Shark Feeding Ecology: What Sharks Eat and How They Hunt

Sharks occupy a wide range of trophic positions in marine food webs, from filter feeders that consume zooplankton to apex predators that hunt marine mammals. Their diets vary by species, body size, habitat depth, and life stage, and their hunting strategies are shaped by jaw mechanics, tooth shape, and sensory systems. This article describes the major dietary categories among sharks, the evidence for ontogenetic dietary shifts, and the hunting mechanisms that support different feeding modes. The practical utility is a dietary classification table with examples that researchers, students, and fisheries professionals can use to interpret stomach content data, stable isotope results, and behavioral observations.

At a Glance: Shark Dietary Classification

Sharks are not a single feeding guild. They range from obligate filter feeders to specialized benthic predators to wide-ranging apex hunters. The table below organizes major dietary categories with representative species and the primary evidence used to characterize their diets.

Trophic Positions and Ecological Roles

Sharks function at multiple trophic levels simultaneously. Some species are intermediate consumers that link lower and higher levels of the food web, while others are upper-level predators whose removal can alter ecosystem structure. The pyjama shark (Poroderma africanum), an endemic South African catshark, illustrates the mesopredator role. Stable isotope analysis showed adults select more benthic prey while juveniles consume more planktonic species, with juveniles being more generalist than adults (Trophic Ecology of the Pyjama Shark Elucidated by Stable Isotopes). The same study noted that removal of top predators can cause mesopredator release, leading to increases in mesopredators with consequent changes in ecosystem energy balance.

Fisheries professionals should recognize that a shark species cannot be assigned a single trophic level without accounting for life stage and habitat. Management decisions based on adult diets alone may miss critical juvenile feeding requirements. For example, the rasptail skate (Raja velezi) specializes in shrimps during early life stages and shifts toward teleosts as it matures, while the brown smoothhound shark remains an opportunistic generalist across life stages (Ontogenetic dietary shifts and feeding ecology of the rasptail skate and brown smoothhound shark). These differences affect how each species responds to prey availability changes and fisheries pressure.

Filter Feeding and Ram Filtration

Filter feeding sharks consume large volumes of water and extract small organisms. The whale shark and basking shark are the two largest shark species and both employ ram filter feeding, swimming forward with mouths open to strain prey. Research at Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia documented ram filter-feeding and nocturnal feeding behavior in whale sharks (Ram filter-feeding and nocturnal feeding of whale sharks at Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia). Nocturnal feeding suggests whale sharks track vertically migrating zooplankton and small pelagic organisms that move toward the surface at night.

Basking sharks show similar reliance on plankton availability. Satellite telemetry in the eastern North Pacific revealed that nearshore basking sharks preferred shelf and slope habitat around San Diego, Point Conception, and Monterey Bay, moving north in summer (Basking Shark Movements in the Eastern North Pacific Determined Using Satellite Telemetry). One tagged shark displayed a distinct diel pattern offshore, spending days at approximately 450 to 470 meters and nights at 250 to 300 meters, corresponding with the diel migration of a portion of the deep scattering layer. This vertical behavior indicates basking sharks track prey depth instead of remaining at the surface.

Filter feeders also serve as indicators of pelagic contamination. Studies have examined zooplankton as bioindicators of marine contamination for filter-feeding basking sharks, fin whales, and devil rays at Caprera Canyon in the Mediterranean Sea (Zooplankton as a Bioindicator of Marine Contamination for Filter-Feeding Basking Sharks, Fin Whales and Devil Rays at Caprera Canyon). Additional research has evaluated large filter-feeding organisms, including the Mediterranean basking shark and fin whale, as indicators of microplastic in the pelagic environment (Large filter feeding marine organisms as indicators of microplastic in the pelagic environment). These studies support using filter-feeding sharks in environmental monitoring programs because their feeding mode exposes them directly to suspended particles and contaminants.

Jaw Mechanics and Biting Strategies

Tooth shape has historically been used as the primary predictor of shark feeding behavior, but jaw mechanics provide a more complete picture. Finite element analysis of the jaws of great white sharks and sandtiger sharks (Carcharias taurus) showed that sandtiger jaws are adapted for rapid closure while great white jaws are adapted for generation of maximum bite force (Mechanics of biting in great white and sandtiger sharks). These functional differences are consistent with diet and dentition. The same study found that jaw adductor muscles insert on a central tendon, which straightens and sustains muscle fibers at nearly orthogonal insertion angles as the mouth opens. This arrangement allows high bite forces to be maintained across a wider range of gape angles than observed in mammalian models.

The study also identified a mechanical vulnerability in sub-adult great white sharks. The jaws of sub-adults are mechanically vulnerable when handling large prey, suggesting that further mineralization of the jaws may be required before they can effectively feed on marine mammals (Mechanics of biting in great white and sandtiger sharks). This finding has practical implications for interpreting age-related diet shifts. A sub-adult great white may select smaller prey not because of preference but because its jaws cannot yet withstand the forces required to subdue large pinnipeds.

Suction Feeding and Labial Cartilages

Labial cartilages lie in the folds of connective tissue framing the gape of elasmobranch chondrichthyans and influence the ability to create suction during feeding. A study based on CT scans of more than 100 extant shark species, representing at least one member of every living family within the Euselachii excluding batoids, found that sharks without labial cartilages or with only small remnants are ram feeders or use pure biting and mainly occupy higher trophic levels (Morphological Variability and Function of Labial Cartilages in Sharks). Suction-feeding sharks have higher numbers of well-developed labial cartilages, up to five pairs, and occupy slightly lower trophic levels, mainly as secondary consumers.

The cookie-cutter shark (Isistius brasiliensis), an ectoparasite, displays distinct shapes of labial cartilages, while generalist species exhibit a simpler arrangement (Morphological Variability and Function of Labial Cartilages in Sharks). The study proposed a dichotomous identification key to classify individual labial cartilages into morphotypes and combinations that result in suction feeding differing in strength. This framework allows researchers to infer feeding strategies in lesser-known extant sharks and potentially extinct species based on skeletal morphology alone.

Ontogenetic Dietary Shifts

Many shark species change their diets as they grow. These shifts are documented across multiple families and habitats, and they affect how researchers interpret stomach content data and how managers predict responses to prey fluctuations.

Coastal and Estuarine Species

Blacktip sharks in the western Gulf of Mexico showed ontogenetic shifts from smaller prey such as clupeids and small sciaenids to larger, higher trophic level prey including Ariidae and elasmobranchs (New insights into the trophic ecology of blacktip sharks). The same study noted that clupeids and sciaenids comprise 69% of blacktip shark diets in the Gulf of Mexico, but in coastal Texas clupeids comprised less than 2% of diets while striped mullet (Mugil cephalus) and red drum (Sciaenops ocellatus) comprised over 70% of identifiable prey. This discrepancy suggests regional understanding of blacktip trophic ecology may be limited by the sizes of sampled sharks.

The study also raised a management concern. Observed increases in blacktip densities coupled with declines in prey such as mugilids and sciaenids is concerning if blacktips have limited diet plasticity. However, Gulf of Mexico blacktips may be more generalized than previously thought, which is promising for conservation and management (New insights into the trophic ecology of blacktip sharks).

Nursery Ground Species

Lemon sharks (Negaprion brevirostris) in nursery grounds display ontogenetic diet shifts and prey selection that indicate a flexible foraging tactic (Ontogenetic diet shifts and prey selection in nursery bound lemon sharks indicate a flexible foraging tactic). Flexible foraging in nursery habitats allows young sharks to exploit available prey instead of competing for a narrow set of resources. This flexibility may be critical for survival in variable coastal environments.

Deep-Sea Species

Deep-sea sharks at Le Danois Bank in the Cantabrian Sea showed distinct depth distributions and feeding patterns. Birdbeak dogfish was not present at the top of the bank but was abundant below 642 meters, while velvet belly lantern shark was abundant in the shallower top of the bank but not found in the deeper inner basin (Resource utilization by deep-sea sharks at the Le Danois Bank). Blackmouth catshark was found over the whole depth range but showed ontogenetic segregation with depth. Eighty percent of specimens collected at the top of the bank were less than 600 millimeters total length with a mean of 510 millimeters, while larger individuals with a mean of 620 millimeters inhabited deeper zones.

Dietary overlap between birdbeak dogfish and blackmouth catshark in the inner basin was low. Birdbeak dogfish was an ichthyophagous predator while blackmouth catshark at those depths consumed a variety of meso-bathypelagic shrimps including Acantephylla pelagica, Pasiphaea species, and Sergia robusta (Resource utilization by deep-sea sharks at the Le Danois Bank). Blackmouth catshark exhibited significantly higher feeding intensity than velvet belly lantern shark at the top of the bank and birdbeak dogfish in the inner basin.

Apex Predator Complexity

The ontogenetic trophic shift paradigm for great white sharks was tested at Guadalupe Island off Mexico using carbon and nitrogen stable isotopes and fatty acids. Contrary to expectations, the study detected no influence of size on muscle stable isotope and fatty acid composition, revealing no significant dietary variation between juvenile and adult sharks (Can biochemical tracers reveal ontogenetic trophic shift and individual prey selection in white sharks). Most sharks were rich in polyunsaturated fatty acids such as long-chain omega 3, suggesting a local diet of mainly pelagic prey, potentially large fish or cephalopods. A few individuals appeared to show recent consumption of pinnipeds, with higher proportions of saturated and monounsaturated fatty acids.

These individual differences in fatty acid composition could reflect an ecological trade-off between consumption of prey rich in fat, such as marine mammals, versus prey rich in polyunsaturated fatty acids, such as pelagic prey (Can biochemical tracers reveal ontogenetic trophic shift and individual prey selection in white sharks). The study also noted that refining the role of apex predators in marine food webs is necessary for predicting the consequences of their global decline under the footprint of fishing activities.

Prey Selectivity and Opportunistic Feeding

Sharks range from highly selective feeders to opportunistic generalists. This distinction matters for conservation because selective feeders are at higher risk when preferred prey decline.

Selective Benthic Feeders

The yellow ray in The Bahamas displayed high selectivity for polychaetes. Stomach contents from 117 rays yielded 535 prey items representing five taxonomic groups, dominated by polychaetes and decapod crustaceans at 87% of total diet (Comparative feeding ecology of the yellow ray from The Bahamas). Environmental sampling reported 5249 individual taxa represented by 62 taxonomic groups, meaning the rays consumed a very narrow subset of available prey. Foraging strategy plots suggested preferential prey is rare within the environment, and the Manly-Chesson index validated that polychaetes were consumed with high selectivity.

The spotted eagle ray in Bermuda also showed prey specialization. Gut content analysis revealed a diet of mainly bivalves and a few gastropods, with calico clam (Macrocallista maculata) representing the most important prey item (Estimating the potential impacts of large mesopredators on benthic resources). Manipulative field and mesocosm experiments suggested that rays selected prey patches based on density, though there was no evidence of rays depleting clam patches to extirpation. At current population levels, spotted eagle rays had modest impacts on local shellfish populations, suggesting a reduced role in transmitting cascading effects from apex predator loss.

Specialized Ambush Predators

The Atlantic angel shark (Squatina dumeril) in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico exhibits prey selection behavior consistent with an ambush predator (Prey selection by the Atlantic angel shark in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico). Angel sharks are flattened benthic species that lie buried in sediment and ambush passing prey. Their prey selection patterns reflect both availability and capture capability.

Generalist Mesopredators

The brown smoothhound shark is an opportunistic predator with a highly diverse diet consisting of teleosts, cephalopods, shrimps, and stomatopods (Ontogenetic dietary shifts and feeding ecology of the rasptail skate and brown smoothhound shark). The same study found little evidence of dietary overlap between rasptail skate and brown smoothhound shark across species or life stages. Competition between these species may be reduced by diet specialization in immature rasptail skates, ontogenetic dietary shifts between immature and mature individuals, prey-size selectivity in larger rasptail skates, and differences in depth utilization in overlapping geographical regions.

The Atlantic sharpnose shark (Rhizoprionodon terraenovae) from the northeast Gulf of Mexico shows ontogenetic and site-related trends in diet (Ontogenetic and site-related trends in the diet of the Atlantic sharpnose shark from the northeast Gulf of Mexico). Site-related trends indicate that local prey availability shapes diets more than fixed species preferences.

Practical Assessment Workflow

Researchers and fisheries professionals can apply the following workflow to characterize shark feeding ecology in a study area.

Step 1: Define the Question and Sampling Frame

Determine whether the objective is species-level diet description, ontogenetic shift detection, prey selectivity assessment, or ecosystem modeling. Define the size range and depth range to be sampled. The blacktip shark example shows that sampling only certain size classes can produce a misleading regional diet description (New insights into the trophic ecology of blacktip sharks).

Step 2: Collect Stomach Content Data

Record species, total length, sex, maturity stage, collection depth, and collection location for each specimen. Identify prey to the lowest practical taxonomic level. Quantify prey by number, weight, and frequency of occurrence. The yellow ray study demonstrated that comparing stomach contents with ambient prey availability through sediment surveys allows selectivity analysis (Comparative feeding ecology of the yellow ray from The Bahamas).

Step 3: Collect Tissue Samples for Stable Isotope and Fatty Acid Analysis

Muscle tissue biopsies provide less invasive trophic information than stomach contents. Stable isotope analysis of carbon and nitrogen characterizes assimilated diet over longer time scales, while fatty acid analysis can distinguish recent consumption of fat-rich prey versus polyunsaturated fatty acid-rich prey (Can biochemical tracers reveal ontogenetic trophic shift and individual prey selection in white sharks). The pyjama shark study used the R packages SIMMR and SIBER to estimate the contribution of potential food sources to the diet and to evaluate the extent of trophic niches (Trophic Ecology of the Pyjama Shark Elucidated by Stable Isotopes).

Step 4: Analyze Ontogenetic Patterns

Plot dietary metrics against body size to detect shifts. The rasptail skate and brown smoothhound study demonstrated clear ontogenetic dietary shifts with crustaceans dominating immature individuals and teleosts dominating adults (Ontogenetic dietary shifts and feeding ecology of the rasptail skate and brown smoothhound shark). The great white shark study at Guadalupe Island showed that ontogenetic shifts are not universal, emphasizing the need for site-specific analysis (Can biochemical tracers reveal ontogenetic trophic shift and individual prey selection in white sharks).

Step 5: Interpret Results Within Habitat Context

Depth distribution, sediment type, and prey availability shape shark diets. The Le Danois Bank study defined two habitats with different depths and sediment characteristics, and shark species showed almost no bathymetric overlap (Resource utilization by deep-sea sharks at the Le Danois Bank). Habitat-specific sampling is required to avoid confounding depth effects with dietary differences.

Records and Measurements

Standardized records support comparison across studies and regions. Minimum data fields for each specimen include species, total length in millimeters, sex, maturity stage, collection depth in meters, collection location with coordinates, collection date, and gear type. For stomach contents, record prey taxon, prey count, prey weight, and digestion state. For tissue samples, record tissue type, preservation method, and analysis type.

The deep-sea shark study at Le Danois Bank used total length measurements to detect ontogenetic segregation with depth, with 80% of blackmouth catsharks at the top of the bank measuring less than 600 millimeters total length while deeper individuals averaged 620 millimeters (Resource utilization by deep-sea sharks at the Le Danois Bank). Length measurements are essential for detecting such patterns.

Common Failure Patterns in Diet Studies

Several recurring errors compromise shark diet studies. Sampling only one size class produces biased diet descriptions, as demonstrated by the blacktip shark example where regional understanding was limited by the sizes of sampled sharks (New insights into the trophic ecology of blacktip sharks). Ignoring habitat depth confounds dietary differences with depth segregation, as shown by the near-zero bathymetric overlap between birdbeak dogfish and velvet belly lantern shark (Resource utilization by deep-sea sharks at the Le Danois Bank). Relying solely on stomach contents misses assimilated diet that stable isotope and fatty acid analysis can reveal (Can biochemical tracers reveal ontogenetic trophic shift and individual prey selection in white sharks). Assuming tooth shape predicts feeding behavior without considering jaw mechanics can mislead dietary inference (Mechanics of biting in great white and sandtiger sharks).

Limitations of Dietary Evidence

Each dietary assessment method has constraints. Stomach contents reflect only recent meals and can be biased by differential digestion rates. Stable isotopes integrate diet over longer periods but require trophic discrimination factors that vary by species and tissue, and the Guadalupe Island study noted that stable isotopes did not allow definitive conclusions due to significant variability in the contribution of different potential prey depending on the trophic discrimination factors used (Can biochemical tracers reveal ontogenetic trophic shift and individual prey selection in white sharks). Fatty acids provide recent dietary information but can be influenced by metabolic processing. Labial cartilage morphology allows inference of feeding mode but does not identify specific prey (Morphological Variability and Function of Labial Cartilages in Sharks).

Welfare and Safety Context

Shark diet research involving live animals should follow institutional animal care protocols and regional permitting requirements. Biopsy sampling for stable isotope analysis is less invasive than lethal collection but still requires appropriate training and permits. Researchers working with large apex predators such as great white sharks should follow established safety protocols for capture, handling, and tissue sampling. The great white shark jaw mechanics study noted that both great white and sandtiger sharks are threatened species, and research methods should minimize disturbance to vulnerable populations (Mechanics of biting in great white and sandtiger sharks).

Professional Escalation Criteria

Fisheries managers and researchers should escalate findings to relevant authorities when diet studies reveal conservation concerns. Specific triggers include evidence that a protected or threatened species depends on a prey base that is overharvested, as with blacktip sharks and declining mugilid and sciaenid prey in the Gulf of Mexico (New insights into the trophic ecology of blacktip sharks). Evidence of mesopredator release following apex predator decline warrants ecosystem-level management review (Trophic Ecology of the Pyjama Shark Elucidated by Stable Isotopes). Documentation of filter-feeding sharks accumulating contaminants or microplastics should be reported to environmental monitoring agencies (Large filter feeding marine organisms as indicators of microplastic in the pelagic environment). Evidence that a mesopredator consumes exploitable shellfish species at levels that affect commercial or recreational fisheries should trigger consultation with fisheries management authorities (Estimating the potential impacts of large mesopredators on benthic resources).

Frequently Asked Questions

What do most sharks eat?

Most sharks are carnivorous and consume fish, cephalopods, crustaceans, and other marine animals. Dietary composition varies widely by species, size, and habitat. The brown smoothhound shark eats a diverse diet of teleosts, cephalopods, shrimps, and stomatopods (Ontogenetic dietary shifts and feeding ecology of the rasptail skate and brown smoothhound shark). Some sharks specialize on benthic invertebrates such as polychaetes and bivalves (Comparative feeding ecology of the yellow ray from The Bahamas).

Do all sharks eat meat?

No. Some sharks are filter feeders that consume zooplankton and small pelagic organisms. Whale sharks and basking sharks employ ram filter feeding to strain prey from the water (Ram filter-feeding and nocturnal feeding of whale sharks at Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia). Filter-feeding sharks occupy a different trophic position than predatory sharks and are studied as indicators of pelagic contamination (Zooplankton as a Bioindicator of Marine Contamination for Filter-Feeding Basking Sharks, Fin Whales and Devil Rays at Caprera Canyon).

How do sharks hunt their prey?

Sharks use several hunting strategies including ram feeding, suction feeding, and pure biting. Jaw mechanics differ by species, with sandtiger jaws adapted for rapid closure and great white jaws adapted for maximum bite force (Mechanics of biting in great white and sandtiger sharks). Labial cartilages support suction feeding in species that occupy lower trophic levels (Morphological Variability and Function of Labial Cartilages in Sharks).

Do sharks change their diet as they grow?

Many species show ontogenetic dietary shifts. Rasptail skates specialize on shrimps during early life and shift toward teleosts as they mature (Ontogenetic dietary shifts and feeding ecology of the rasptail skate and brown smoothhound shark). Blacktip sharks shift from smaller clupeids and sciaenids to larger prey including Ariidae and elasmobranchs (New insights into the trophic ecology of blacktip sharks). However, great white sharks at Guadalupe Island showed no significant dietary variation between juveniles and adults (Can biochemical tracers reveal ontogenetic trophic shift and individual prey selection in white sharks).

What is prey selectivity in sharks?

Prey selectivity occurs when a shark consumes certain prey at higher proportions than their availability in the environment. Yellow rays in The Bahamas consumed polychaetes with high selectivity even though polychaetes were rare in the environment (Comparative feeding ecology of the yellow ray from The Bahamas). Spotted eagle rays selected prey patches based on density (Estimating the potential impacts of large mesopredators on benthic resources).

Why do deep-sea sharks have different diets?

Deep-sea sharks partition resources by depth and prey type. At Le Danois Bank, birdbeak dogfish was an ichthyophagous predator below 642 meters while blackmouth catshark consumed meso-bathypelagic shrimps (Resource utilization by deep-sea sharks at the Le Danois Bank). Depth segregation reduces competition between species.

How do researchers study shark diets?

Researchers use stomach content analysis, stable isotope analysis of muscle tissue, fatty acid analysis, and behavioral observation. The pyjama shark study used stable isotope analysis with SIMMR and SIBER packages to estimate food source contributions and trophic niche extent (Trophic Ecology of the Pyjama Shark Elucidated by Stable Isotopes). The great white shark study combined stable isotopes and fatty acids to characterize trophic ecology (Can biochemical tracers reveal ontogenetic trophic shift and individual prey selection in white sharks).

Why does shark diet matter for conservation?

Diet determines how sharks respond to prey fluctuations and fisheries pressure. Selective feeders are at higher risk when preferred prey decline, while generalists show greater resilience (New insights into the trophic ecology of blacktip sharks). Removal of apex predators can cause

Related Articles

• Classification Biology
• Biology Classification
• Metagenomic Taxonomic Classification
• Metagenomic Taxonomic Classification
• Metagenomic Taxonomic Classification

References and Further Reading

• NCBI Literature Resources. National Center for Biotechnology Information.
• PubMed. National Library of Medicine.
• Can biochemical tracers reveal ontogenetic trophic shift and individual prey selection in white sharks from Guadalupe Island, Northeast Pacific?. Environmental research, 2024.
• Mechanics of biting in great white and sandtiger sharks.. Journal of biomechanics, 2011.
• Resource utilization by deep-sea sharks at the Le Danois Bank, Cantabrian Sea, north-east Atlantic Ocean.. Journal of fish biology, 2009.
• Trophic Ecology of the Pyjama Shark Poroderma africanum (Gmelin, 1789) Elucidated by Stable Isotopes.. Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024.
• New insights into the trophic ecology of blacktip sharks (Carcharhinus limbatus) from a subtropical estuary in the western Gulf of Mexico.. Journal of fish biology, 2021.
• Ontogenetic dietary shifts and feeding ecology of the rasptail skate Raja velezi and the brown smoothhound shark Mustelus henlei along the Pacific coast of Costa Rica, Central America.. Journal of fish biology, 2012.
• Comparative feeding ecology of the yellow ray Urobatis jamaicensis (Urotrygonidae) from The Bahamas.. Journal of fish biology, 2018.
• Estimating the potential impacts of large mesopredators on benthic resources: integrative assessment of spotted eagle ray foraging ecology in Bermuda.. PloS one, 2012.
• Morphological Variability and Function of Labial Cartilages in Sharks (Chondrichthyes, Elasmobranchii).. 2023.
• Mesolithic Hunter-Gatherer Adaptations to Small Mediterranean Island Ecosystems. 2026.
• A Novel Starfish Optimization Algorithm for Secure STAR-RIS Communications.. 2026.
• Frequency regulation of interconnected hybrid power system with Assimilation of electrical vehicles.. 2024.
• Zooplankton as a Bioindicator of Marine Contamination for Filter-Feeding Basking Sharks, Fin Whales and Devil Rays at Caprera Canyon (Mediterranean Sea). Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 2025.
• Large filter feeding marine organisms as indicators of microplastic in the pelagic environment: the case studies of the Mediterranean basking shark (Cetorhinus maximus) and fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus).. Marine Environmental Research, 2014.
• Ram filter-feeding and nocturnal feeding of whale sharks (Rhincodon typus) at Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia. 2007.
• Basking Shark (Cetorhinus maximus) Movements in the Eastern North Pacific Determined Using Satellite Telemetry. Frontiers in Marine Science, 2018.
• Ontogenetic diet shifts and prey selection in nursery bound lemon sharks, Negaprion brevirostris, indicate a flexible foraging tactic. Environmental Biology of Fishes, 2012.
• Prey selection by the Atlantic angel shark Squatina dumeril in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Bulletin of Marine Science, 2008.
• Ontogenetic and site-related trends in the diet of the Atlantic sharpnose shark Rhizoprionodon terraenovae from the northeast Gulf of Mexico. Bulletin of Marine Science, 2006.

This article is educational and does not replace institutional policy, professional advice, or applicable safety and regulatory requirements.