NOTES A FURTHER OBSERVATION OF THE PREY-HANDLING BEHANVIOR OF THE GREAT HAMMERHEAD SHARK, SPHYRNA MOKA1RR4N: PREDATION UPON THE SPOTTED EAGLE RAY
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, 7(0(3):947 952, 2002
NOTES
A FURTHER OBSERVATION OF THE PREY-HANDLING BEHANVIOR
OF THE GREAT HAMMERHEAD SHARK, SPHYRNA MOKA1RR4N:
PREDATION UPON THE SPOTTED EAGLE RAY,
AETOBATUS NARINARI
Demian D. Chapman and Samuel H. Gruber
Although observations of natural predation by large sharks are extremely rare, they can
provide important insights into the feeding behavior, ecology and functional morphology
of these apex predators (Klimley et al., 1992; Strong, 199 1; Tricas and McCosker, 1984).
In 1988, Strong et al. (1990) made an unprecedem.ed underwater observation of the preda-
tory behavior of a great hammerhead shark, Sphyrna mokarran, during the pursuit and
capture of a southern stingray, Dasyatis americana.Amidst much speculation about the
functional significance of the laterally expanded head (hereafter referred to as the
'cephalofoil') of the hammerhead sharks (Nakaya, 1995; Compagno, 1988; Johnsen and
Teeter, 1985), this observation demonstrated that the cephalofoil can be directly useful in
prey handling. The shark used its head to 'pin' the fleeing stingray against the bottcm and
then 'pivoted' its body into position to deliver an immobilizing bite to the ray's pectoral
disc. Because Strong et al.'s (1990) observation is the only one reported thus far, it re-
mains unknown how frequently the great hammerhead employs such prey-handling be-
havior.
Herein we describe a new observation of batoid prey-handling by the great hammer-
head, upon a spotted eagle ray, Aetobatus narinari.Unlike the observation by Strong et
al. (1990) this attack took place close to the surface and involved a pelagic species of
myliobatid ray. Despite this, there were some similarities in the two predatory events.
Most notably, the hammerhead once again used its cephalofoil to pin the prey to the
bottom, but in this case only during the post-capture manipulation and consumption of
the immobilized eagle ray. To our knowledge, this is the only observation of rnatural
batoid prey-handling by the great hammerhead since Strong et al. (1990) first documented
this behavior.
OBSERVATION
The predatory episode took place on 2 August 1998, inside a 30 m wide pass between
the islands of North and Mid Turtle Rocks (25 040.13 N, 79°18.34 W), the two northern-
most islets of a chain of small cays running in the north-south direction, starting approxi-
mately 5 km south of South Bimini, Bahamas. Both islands were fringed by a bank (948 BUL, ITIN OF MARINE SCIENC', VOL. 70, NC).3. 2002 Figure 1. Spotted eagle ray, Aetobatus narinari,approximately 2 min after being bitten by a large great hammerhead, Sphvrna rnokarran. approached it we observed a 3.5-4.0 m total length (TL), female great hammerhead shark rapidly closing in at the surface from a distance of less than 2 m. Almost perpendicular to the rays left side, the hammerhead appeared to be herding the ray into shallow water. For approximately 10 s the two animals quickly moved a short distance eastward along the shore, the ray making two more vertical leaps. At this point there was a vigorous splash as the shark's tail broke the surface. We believe the shark grabbed the ray by the left pectoral fin and physically pulled it into deeper water. After about 3 s, the shark turned and swam towards the middle of the pass. The ray could not be seen. The shark then swam in a wide circle to the northern side of the pass, and turned back towards Mid Turtle rock. At that moment (< 2 min. after the initial observation), one of us (DDC) entered the water to make detailed observations. DDC immediately spotted the eagle ray on the bottom, ap- proximately 3 m north of the fringing bank of Mid Turtle rock. Its right pectoral fin had been entirely removed in what appeared to be a single bite (Fig. 1), and there was a more superficial laceration on its left pectoral fin. At this point the shark swam slowly to within I m of the observer, and then turned and continued to swim in a wide, counterclockwise arc around the immobilized ray. After about 20 s an approximately 1.5 m TL blacktip shark, Carcharhinuslimbatus, appeared from the west (ocean) side of the pass and closely circled the ray in an apparently excited manner. The hammerhead almost immediately altered its course and closed from about 7 m to within 2 m of the blacktip, its mouth partially agape. At that point the blacktip darted away and was not seen again.
NOENS 949
.I,
t% '
7~ 7
IN
Figure 2. Great hammerhead executing 'pin and pivot' behavior on the immobilized eagle ray. (A)
Diagrammatic representation. The shark initially appioaches the ray (solid outline) and depresses
its cephalofoil (arrow) onto the ray's dorsal surface, pinning it to substrate. The shark then twists its
body, pivoting atop the ray, until it reaches the position of the dashed outline where, in this case, it
manipulates the ray's head into its jaws. (B) Photograph of 'pin and pivot' behavior.
After about 30 s of swimming in very tight circles around the immobilized ray, the
hammerhead performed the first of a behavior, which we call 'pin and pivot'. This behav-
ior can be described as follows: the shark forcibly pressed the ray against the substrate
with the ventral surface of its cephalofoil, and then, with a twisting motion of its body,
pivoted, its head remaining atop the ray (Fig. 2A,B). In this case it pivoted about 900 and
then engulfed the ray's head in its jaws. The shark picked the ray up off the bottcm and
swam towards the middle of the pass for several seconds (Fig. 3). It then dropped the ray
without removing any tissue. After slowly circling the ray for 1-2 min, the shark per-95() 950
Hi I'TIN 01: MARINI SI'l(E, V(ll, (1,N() .2()2
Figure 3. Great hammerhead carrying the disabled eagle ray by the head. after executing 'pin and
pivot' behavior.
formed its second 'pin and pivot', again grasping the ray by the head and lifting it off the
substrate, this time swimming westward. Once again it dropped the ray without removing
any tissue., this time near the mouth of the pass. The shark circled once and performed its
third 'pin and pivot', this time pivoting 180° to the intact left pectoral fin. It picked the
ray up by the tip of this tin and swam out of the pass into deeper water. Over the next 30
s the shark swallowed the remains of the ray carcass whole from the left wingtip to the
right side of the body, while slowly swimilming away into deep water. The entire episode
lasted less than 10( min.
DISCUSSION
Because of the dominance of demersal fishes in their diet, it is generally believed that
benthic feeding is typical ofthe great hammerhead (Cliff, 1995: Stevens and Lyle, 1989;
Dodrill, 1977). Supporting this, Strong et al. (1990) described previously unknown prey-
handling behavior, whereby the great hamtimerhiead used its cephalofoil to capture a stin-
gray by pinning it to the bottom. In contrast, we observed a large great hammerhead
pursue and capture a spotted eagle ray in mid-water, where such prey- handling behavior
was not possible. AlthougIl henthic feeding may be more typical of the great hammer-
head, our observation highlights that they are also capable of capturing and disabling
pelagic batoid prey in the water column.NOIES 951
Although 'pin and pivot' behavior was not observed during the capture of the eagle ray,
the new observation still generally supports of the hypothesis of Strong et al. (1990) that
the cephalofoil of the great hammerhead shark can be useful in prey-handling. In this
case, the great hammerhead was observed three times to use its cephalofoil to pin the
already immobilized eagle ray against the bottom, then pivoting into position to grasp
part of the ray in its mouth. In the attack observed by Strong et al. (1990) this rype of
behavior was an integral part of the pursuit and capture of a southern stingray near the
bottom. The present observation suggests that the 'pin and pivot' behavior can also func-
tion in the post capture manipulation and consumption of an already immobilized prey
item. Contact between the ventral surface of the cephalofoil and the prey may allow the
hammerhead to use its tactile sense to selectively grasp or avoid a specific part of the prey
(e.g., the head or venomiious caudal spines, respectively), or assess the condition or size of
the prey before deciding when or how to consume it. It should also be noted that Nakaya
(1995) demonstrated that hammerhead sharks have a much greater ability to move their
head up and down on1a vertical plane than otherwise similar carcharhinid sharks, which
would facilitate 'pin and pivot' behavior in the great hammerhead.
Another important parallel between theses two predatory episodes was the placement
of the initial bite on the pectoral disc. In both cases the ray was first immobilized by a
massive bite which removed most of one of its pectoral fins. This supports the suggestion
by Strong et al. (1990) that great hammerheads deliberately attempt to disable large batoids
with the initial bite by targeting the fins used for propulsion. Other species of shark have
been observed to employ a similar strategy when handling large, potentially difficult
prey. The initial bite of a white shark, Carcharodon carcharias,upon a phocid seal or
cetacean is often placed towards the propulsive hind-flippers or fluke (Long and Jones,
1996; Klimley et al., 1996; Tricas and McCosket, 1984), while otariid seals and sea-lions
are often bitten mid-body near their propulsive fore-flippers (Klimley et al., 1996).
In both the present observation and that of S,trong et al. (1990), blacktip sharks, C.
limbatus, were attracted to the site of the hammerhead's kill. Both great hammerheads
were observed to actively exclude these smaller sharks as they attempted to scavenge the
prey, yet neither hammerhead exhibited any aggression towards human observers in the
immediate vicinity.
Typically characterized as a predator of demersal fishes, this observation highlights
that the great hamumerhead is also a capable mid-water predator. It also indicates that the
cephalofoil can play a direct and perhaps more general role in the capture and handling of
both dasyatid and myliobatid rays.
AC KNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank D.Abercrombie, S. Clermont, M. Corcoran, A. Petersen and the
Earthwatch volunteers who participated in this observa.ion. We would also like to thank T. C Tncas,
M. S. Shivji and three anonymous reviewers for their invaluable comments on the manuscript. This
work was supported by the Florida Department of Education, the Earthwatch Institute, PADI Project
AWARE, The Greentweed Foundation, Tom and Shelly Daniels and Todashi and Toshi Fujino. We
thank Davey Marine (M.Aiello, President) for use of their 22' Aquasport, Carolina Skitfs Inc. for
donation of six flat skitfs and Proline Boats. We are grateful to Mercury Motors (Brunswick Corp.) for952 95ILIFETIN OF MARINF SCIENCE. VOL. 70. NO. 3.2002
kindly providing outboard motors and Nimrod for their fine underwater products. Finally, we thank M.
Braynan, Director, Department of Fisheries of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas for issuing permits
to allow us to work in their controlled waters.
LITERATURE CITED
Cliff, G. 1995. Sharks caught in the protective gill nets off KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.8. The
Great hammerhead shark, Sphyrna mokarran (Rueppell). S. Afr. J. Mar. Sci. 15: 105-114.
Compagno, L. J. V. 1988. Sharks of the order Carcharhiniformes. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton,
New Jersey.
Dodrill, J. W. 1977. A hook and line survey of the sharks found within five hundred meters of shore
along Melboume Beach, Brevard County, Florida. M.Sc. Thesis, Florida Institute of Technol-
ogy. 304 p.
Johnsen, P. B. and J. H. Teeter. 1985. Behavioral responses of the bonnethead shark (Sphyrna
tiburo) to controlled olfactory stimulation. Mar. Behav. Physiol. I 1: 283 -29 1.
Klimley, A. P., P. Pyle and S. D. Anderson. 1996. The behavior of white sharks and their pinniped
prey during predatory attacks. Pages 175- 191 In Great White Sharks -The biology of Carcharodon
carcharias.Academic Press.
__________, S. D. Anderson, P. Pyle and R. P. Henderson. 1992. Spatiotemporal patterns of
white shark (Carcharodoncarcharias)predation at the South Farallon Islands, Califomia. Copeia
1992 3: 680-690.
Long, D. J. and R. E. Jones. 1996. White shark predation on cetaceans in the Eastem North Pacific
Ocean. Pages 293-307 In Great White Sharks-The biology of Carcharodon carcharias.Aca-
demic Press.
Nakaya, K. 1995. Hydrodynamic function of the head in the hammerhead sharks (Elasmobranchii:
Sphyrinidae). Copeia 1995 2: 330- 336.
Stevens, J. D. and J. M. Lyle. 1989. Biology of the hammerhead sharks (Eusphyrna blochii, Sphyrna
mokarran, S. lewini) from northem Australia. Aust. J. Mar. Freshw. Res. 40(2): 151-199.
Strong, W. R. 1991.Instruments of natural selection: How important are sharks? In S. H. Gruber,
ed. Discovering sharks. S.H. Amer. Littoral Soc., Highlands, New Jersey.
, S. H. Gruber and F. F. Snelson. 1990. Hammerhead shark predation on stingrays: an
observation of prey handling by Sphyrna mokarrann. Copeia, 1990 3: 836-840.
Tricas, T. C. and J. E. McCosker. 1984. Predatory behavior of the white shark, Carcharodon
carcharias,with notes on it's biology. IProc. California Acad. Sci. 43(14): 221-238.
DATE SUBMITTED: December 11, 2000. DATrE ACCEPTED: July 9, 2001.
ADDRESSES: (D.D.C.) Guy Harvey Research Institute. Oceanographic Center Nova Southeastern
University,8000 N. Ocean Drive, DaniaBeach, Florida33004. E-mail: .
(S.H.G.) Bimini Biological FieldStation and University oJ'Miami, Miami, Florida33149.COPYRIGHT INFORMATION
TITLE: A Further Observation of the Prey-handling Behavior of
the Great Hammerhead Shark, Sphyrna mokarran:
Predation Upon the Spotted Eagle Ray, Aetobatus
narinari
SOURCE: Bull Mar Sci 70 no3 My 2002
WN: 0212105190013
The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and it
is reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article in
violation of the copyright is prohibited.
Copyright 1982-2003 The H.W. Wilson Company. All rights reserved.You can also read
