Overview
Family : Megamouth sharks ; Oceanic , possibly occurring in depths between 150 and 1,000 m (Ref. 6871). Feeds on planktivorous prey such as euphausiid shrimps, copepods and jellyfish (Ref. 6871). May also eat small midwater fishes . Possibly less active than the basking and whale sharks (Ref. 6871). Its feeding habits and habitat suggest that it may be a rare catch in the future. Ovoviviparous, embryos feeding on yolk sac and other ova produced by the mother (Ref. 50449). Males mature by 400 cm (Ref. 6871). A bright white band on the snout just above the upper jaw may play a role in feeding behavior or with recognition of individuals (Ref. 47761). Preyed on by the semi-parasitic cookiecutter shark , Isistius brasiliensis .
Common Names
Click on the language to view common names.
Common Names in Danish:
Megamundhaj
Common Names in Dutch:
Grootbekhaai
Common Names in English:
Megamouth, Megamouth Shark
Common Names in French:
Requin Grande Guele, Requin Grande Gueule
Common Names in Mandarin Chinese:
大口鯊, 大口鯊, 大口鲨
Common Names in Spanish:
Tiburón Bocón, Tiburón Bocudo, Tiburn Blanco, Tiburn Bocn, Tiburn Bocudo
Common Names in Swedish:
Jttemunhaj, Megamouth
Description
Family Megachasmidae
Known only from the type locality near the Hawaiian Islands in 165 m depth. Trunk cylindrical and somewhat compressed , stout. Head very long, snout extremely short but broadly rounded , huge terminal mouth that extends behind the eyes. Gigantic filter-feeding shark . Ovoviviparous, embryos feeding on yolk sac and other ova produced by the mother (Ref. 50449).The family Megachasmidae belongs to the Class Elasmobranchii (sharks and rays ) and the Order Lamniformes. It contains 1 genus and 1 species. It may be found in Marine environments and is primarily Marine. Members of this family are not used in the aquarium trade. Reproductively, most members of this family are nonguarders. The main mode of swimming of adult fish in this family is subcarangiform. Etymology of this family name : Greek, mega = big + Greek, chasma = narrow
Physical Description
Species Megachasma pelagios
Distinctive Features: Body stout, tapering posteriorly. Head
bulbous, wide and long; snout very short and broadly rounded
. Gill slits
moderate long but not reaching dorsal surface of head. Mouth
broad, terminal
, corner extending behind
eyes. Caudal peduncle without keels
or ridges
.
First dorsal fin origin
closer to pectoral fin bases
than to pelvic fin bases; dorsal fins relatively low; second dorsal fin less than half size of first dorsal fin. Pectoral fins shorter than head length in adults
. Caudal fin asymmetrical, with pronounced ventral lobe
.
Dentition: The megamouth has approximately fifty rows
of very small and relatively numerous
teeth on each jaw, but only three rows are functional. Females seem to present fewer teeth rows than males. Upper and lower jaws
have a symphyseal (where the two halves of the jaw meet) toothless space, but it is larger in upper jaw. A difference between the upper and lower teeth was recognized on a female specimen. The first five upper teeth are smaller than the first five lower teeth; the more distal upper teeth are smaller than the lower teeth; the cusps
of the lower teeth are more acute and longer
than those of the upper teeth.
Mucous
and Dermal Denticles
: Megamouth sharks
have very small mucous (on the tongue) and dermal
(on the skin
) denticles
that differ in shape
and size at each region of the body. There are many pigment cells
on the dorsal side, but none on the ventral
side.
Color:
Dorsal surface of body, pectoral
and pelvic fins, dorsal fins, center of anal fin and caudal fin are blackish brown. Ventral
surface of body, below level of pectoral end pelvic fins, tips
and posterior margins
of pectoral and pelvic fins, abruptly white, as the posterior margins of dorsal and anal fins and postventral caudal margins
.
Dorsal side of head
is blackish brown, except areas between nostril and eye and between eye and spiracle, which are paler than the rest of dorsal area of head. Lateral
side of head behind mouth
corner is darker. Lower jaw dark with silver tint and many small dark blotches. Ventral side of head behind lower jaw dirty white.
Mouth roof on dorsal and lateral parts, and oral
membranes
, silvery. Tongue purplish brown with slight silvery tint on both sides, dorsally
and ventrally. Both sexes seem to have a white band
on the anterior surface of the snout. This white band could be considered a feeding behavioral characteristic, because it is so contrasted by the dark coloration
of the snout and upper jaw, and becomes very prominent
when the upper jaw is protruded. Probably under low light this white band may be more visible. This band might also be related to recognition of other individuals of the same species.
Size/Age/Growth
The sizes of all reported megamouth sharks are listed in a table (see Table). Maximum size is at least 550cm (17ft). Males mature by 400cm (13ft) and female by 500cm (16ft).
Habitat
As its species name (pelagios, the Greek word for "of the sea') suggests, the megamouth lives epipelagicly (in the upper part of the water column ) in open ocean. Although only few sightings of megamouth have been reported, the capture of the 6th megamouth was very important in augmenting our understanding of the ecology of this species. This specimen was tagged and followed for two days, allowing insight into its habitat preference and behavior. It remained at a depth of 15m during the night, then dove to 150m at dawn and returned to shallow waters at dusk. So the megamouth is presumed to be a vertical migrator on a diel cycle, spending the daytime in deep waters and ascending to midwater depths at night.
Biome: Saltwater . Pelagic .
Ecology:
List of Habitats
:10.1Marine Oceanic
- Epipelagic
(0-200m)
Biology
Diet
The megamouth shark
, which reaches
over than 500cm in length, is one of the three giant filter-feeding sharks
in the sea
. The other two are the basking
shark (Cetorhinus maximus) and the whale shark
(Rhincodon typus).
Precise details of feeding behavior are unknown due to the lack of observations on a live, feeding specimen. However, some inferences can be made from morphological observations on the captured specimens. The megamouth shark, as its vernacular name indicates, has a huge mouth
that is terminal
and extends behind
the eyes.
Stomach Contents: All analyzed specimens presented euphausiid shrimp in the stomach, indicating a filter-feeding habit. The stomach of the first megamouth captured contained only one type
of shrimp, Thysanopoda pectinata. The second megamouth's stomach contents included
fragments of euphasiids, copepods
(animals that make up plankton
) and the jellyfish
, Atolla vanhoeffeni. In general, euphasiids are the main alimentary item of megamouth diet
.
Origin
of Filter-Feeding: There are two conflicting hypotheses about the origin of filter feeding
in megamouth exist. The first theory suggests a single origin for this habit between megamouth and basking sharks
. In contrast, the other suggests that adaptations for filter feeding evolved independently in the two lineages
from different ancestral origins. Results of recent studies argue strongly in favor of the latter hypothesis
. This makes sense when considering morphological and behavioral differences between the two sharks. The second hypothesis also suggests that megamouth may have evolved its distinctive feeding apparatus from an ancestral sand
tiger-like shark (family
Odontaspidae) through jaw size exaggeration
, acquisition
of papillose
(bud-like) gill rakers, and modification of jaw protrusion for suction feeding.
Reproduction
The megamouths II and VI were both mature
males, and both showed evidence of recent mating. The claspers
of megamouth II were oozing spermatophores and those of the sixth specimen were abraded
and bleeding
, a common occurrence in sharks
that have just mated. The 6th megamouth also had a fresh wound on the lower jaw, a feature found in other sharks that grasp one another's mouth
during mating. Megamouth II was taken in late November and megamouth VI in late October, these factors
make scientists believe that Southern California might be a mating area for megamouth sharks
in the fall
.
The claspers of the first captured megamouth were fully described. Its claspers were relatively slender, with tip
elongated, forming a very narrow, slender process
.
The 7th megamouth observed, a female with 471cm in total length was heavily studied and one of the conclusions is that this specimen is immature
. This judgement was based on uteri that were enlarged only posteriorly, a poorly developed ovary and ostium
and the small size of the oocytes
. The ovary of the megamouth is similar to other mackerel sharks
and this suggests that megamouth embryos are oophagous (the first well-developed embryo eats the other eggs
in the uterus
). The 12th megamouth captured is the only known mature female. The total length of this specimen was 5.44m and the expanded uteri measured 260mm. The right
ovary possessed a large number of whitish yellow eggs.
Behavior
Only two observations of megamouth provide information about this species behavior. The 6th specimen from Dana Point
, California (21 October 1990) offered the most important insights into the behavior of this species. The male specimen, with 494cm in total length, was tagged and tracked for two days. One of the conclusions of these observations is that megamouth is probably a vertical
migrator on a diel
cycle spending the daytime in deep waters
and ascending
to midwater
depths at night. This vertical migration
may be a response to the movements of the small animals on which it feeds
. The krill that make up part of megamouth's diet
are known to migrate from deep waters to the surface.
Megamouth, in contrast to many other deep-water sharks
, shows a decrease in specific gravity in the form of a soft, and poorly calcified cartilaginous
skeleton; very soft, loose
skin
; and loose connective tissue
and muscles. Others epibenthic
(live in the water just above the bottom
) and epipelagic
sharks often have an enlargement of their abdominal cavity
and increased liver
volume. The huge liver allows for greater production
of liver oil
in order
to reduce specific gravity and increase hydrostatic support
.
The 13th sighted also offered important megamouth behavioral observations. This sighting documented sperm
whales
attacking megamouth shark
. Observers
reported that the megamouth was swimming slowly and apparently confused at the surface. The shark showed signs of the whales' attack, on the base
of its dorsal fin and gills
.
Predators:
The only confirmed register of a megamouth predator
is an isolated event of sperm
whales
(Physeter macrocephalus) attacking this shark
. This occurred in Manado, North Sulawesi, Indonesia (30th August 1998) near midday, while some researchers were observing the whales. The base
of the dorsal fin and the gills
of the shark showed signs of the whales' attack.
Sperm whales are usually considered squid feeders
but there are a few notes
about small deep-sea
sharks
in their diet
. This behavioral observation significantly alters our views
on the relationship
between whales and sharks
Parasites:
Almost all megamouth reported presented scars
in different parts of body. These scars are considered bite
marks
of the cookiecutter shark
(Isistius brasiliensis). Cookiecutter sharks
are small dogfish sharks
that attach to prey
with the help of suctorial
(aiding in suction) lips
, and a modified pharynx. The cookiecutter removes a conical
plug
of flesh from the sides of the prey, leaving a crater-like wound. This parasitic
shark is presumed to be a vertical
migrator on a diel
cycle, spending the daytime in deep waters
and ascending
to midwater
depths and to the surface at night. The similar suggested pattern of megamouth combined with its slow swimming speed would make it easy prey for the active
cookiecutter shark. Some specimens, males and females, of a parasitic copepod (Dinemoleus indeprensus), also have been found on the megamouth body surface.
A few species of parasites are found internally in megamouth sharks
, including specimens of a cestode worm species (Corrugatocephalum ouei) and specimens of a poorly known trypanorhynch (Mixodigma leptaleum) recovered from the intestine contents of the 7th megamouth. A microscopic parasite (Chloromyxum) was also found in this megamouth from its gall bladder
.
Taxonomy
- Domain:
Eukaryota
(
)
- Whittaker & Margulis,1978
- Kingdom:
Animalia
(
)
- Linnaeus, 1758
- animals
- Subkingdom:
Bilateria
(
)
- (Hatschek, 1888) Cavalier-Smith, 1983
- Branch:
Deuterostomia
(
)
- Grobben, 1908
- Infrakingdom:
Chordonia
(
)
- (Haeckel, 1874) Cavalier-Smith, 1998
- Phylum:
Chordata
(
)
- Bateson, 1885
- Chordates
- Subphylum:
Vertebrata
(
)
- Cuvier, 1812
- Vertebrates
- Infraphylum:
Gnathostomata
(
)
- Auct.
- Jawed Vertebrates
- Class:
Chondrichthyes
(
)
- Subclass:
Elasmobranchii
(
)
- Shark-Like Fishes
- Infraclass:
Euselachii
(
)
- Cohort:
Neoselachii
(
)
- Order:
Lamniformes
(
)
- Family:
Megachasmidae
(
)
- Taylor, Compagno & Struhsaker, 1983
- Megamouth Sharks
- Genus:
Megachasma
(
)
- Taylor, Compagno & Struhsaker, 1983
- Specific name:
pelagios
- Taylor, Compagno & Struhsaker, 1983
- Scientific name: - Megachasma pelagios Taylor, Compagno & Struhsaker, 1983
- Specific name:
pelagios
- Taylor, Compagno & Struhsaker, 1983
- Genus:
Megachasma
(
- Family:
Megachasmidae
(
- Order:
Lamniformes
(
- Cohort:
Neoselachii
(
- Infraclass:
Euselachii
(
- Subclass:
Elasmobranchii
(
- Class:
Chondrichthyes
(
- Infraphylum:
Gnathostomata
(
- Subphylum:
Vertebrata
(
- Phylum:
Chordata
(
- Infrakingdom:
Chordonia
(
- Branch:
Deuterostomia
(
- Subkingdom:
Bilateria
(
- Kingdom:
Animalia
(
Unambiguous Synonyms
- Megachasma pelagios Taylor, Compagno and Struhsaker, 1983
Notes
Name
Status: Accepted Name
. Latest taxonomic
scrutiny: October 27, 2000. Other common names
: Dutch: Grootbekhaai, Swedish: Jttemunhaj, Swedish: Megamouth, Danish: Megamundhaj, French: Requin grande gueule, Spanish: Tiburn bocudo
When the first megamouth was captured in 1976, a new shark
family
, genus and species had to be erected.
There are conflicting phylogenetic
hypotheses regarding the evolutionary relationships
between the Megachasmidae and other shark families. One theory suggests that the Megachasmidae is evolutionary derived and form a monophyletic (they have one single common evolutionary ancester) family with basking
shark, Cetorhinidae. Others disagree with this idea and suggest that the Megachasmidae is relatively derived and forms a sister group
to the Cetorhinidae, Lamnidae (mako, white and porbeagle sharks
) and Alopiidae (thresher sharks
). Recent studies suggest that Megachasma pelagios is the most primitive living species within the order
Lamniformes, which contains all the aforementioned families, and has independently evolved the filter feeding
mode
, shared with the basking shark, Cetorhinus maximus. The currently valid
genus Megachasma is derived from the Greek "megas, megalos" = great and "chasma" = cave, while the species name
pelagios is also Greek, meaning of the sea
.
Common Names: Megamouth shark (English), grootbekhaai (Dutch), requin grande gueule (French), and tiburn bocudo (Spanish).
Similar Species
Members of the genus Megachasma
There are approximately 1 species in this genus:
Bibliography
- Berra, T.M. (1997). Some 20th century fish discoveries. Environ. Biol. Fish. 50:1-12.
- Compagno, L.J.V. 1984. FAO species catalogue. Vol. 4. Sharks of the world. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of shark species known to date. FAO Fish. Synop. No. 125, vol. 4.
- Compagno, L.J.V. 2002 Sharks of the World. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of shark species known to date. Vol. 2. Bullhead, mackerel and carpet sharks (Heterodontiformes, Lamniformes and Orectolobiformes). FAO Species Catalogue for Fishery Purposes. No. 1, Vol. 2. FAO, Rome.
- Compagno, Leonard J. V. 1984. Sharks of the World: An annotated and illustrated catalogue of shark species known to date. FAO Fisheries Synopsis, no. 125, vol. 4, pt. 1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, Italy.
- Eschmeyer, William N., ed. 1998. Catalog of Fishes. Special Publication of the Center for Biodiversity Research and Information, no. 1, vol 1-3. California Academy of Sciences. San Francisco, California, USA. 2905. ISBN: 0-940228-47-5.
- Last, P.R. and J.D. Stevens (1994). Sharks and rays of Australia. CSIRO, Australia. 513 p.
- Nelson, Joseph S. 1994. Fishes of the World, Third Edition. John Wiley and Sons. New York, New York, USA. xvii + 600. ISBN: 0-471-54713-1.
- Robins, Richard C., Reeve M. Bailey, Carl E. Bond, James R. Brooker, Ernest A. Lachner, et al. 1991. Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States and Canada, Fifth Edition. American Fisheries Society Special Publication, no. 20. American Fisheries Society. Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 183. ISBN: 0-913235-70-9.
- Shark Specialist Group. 2000. IUCN Shark Specialist Group Red List Assessments, 2000 (unpublished report).
- Shark Specialist Group. For more information, see the Specialist Group website.
More Info
- Search for Pictures: images.google.com
- Search for Scholarly Articles: Google Scholar
- Search using Scientific Name and Vernacular Names: All the Web | AltaVista Canada | AltaVista | Excite | Google | HotBot | Lycos
- Search using Specialized Databases: GenBank | Medline | Scirus | CISTI/CAL | Agricola Periodicals | Agricola Books
Notes
Contributors
- Brands, S.J. (comp.) 1989-2006. Systema Naturae 2000. The Taxonomicon. Universal Taxonomic Services, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Accessed October 9, 2006.
- Compagno , L.J.V. 2000. Megachasma pelagios. In: IUCN 2006. 2006 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 21 October 2006.
- Compagno, L.J.V. 2000. In IUCN 2008. 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCNRedList.org. Downloaded July 18, 2008.
- Compagno, Leonard J.V. (from FishBase).
- Global Biodiversity Information Facility. Accessed March 01, 2008. http://www.gbif.org Mediated distribution data from 3 providers.
- MBLWHOI Library: Universal Biological Index and Organizer. uBio.org accessed July 18, 2008.
- Martins, Carol & Craig Knickle. Florida Museum of Natural History
Data Sources
Accessed through GBIF Data Portal March 01, 2008:
- Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum: Bishop Museum Natural History Specimen Data
- Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences, Rutgers University: Bishop Museum Data (OBIS distribution) (USOBIS)
- Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences, Rutgers University: iziko South African Museum - Fish Collection
- Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences, Rutgers University: iziko South African Museum - Shark Collection
- Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History: Vertebrate specimens
Identifiers
- Biodiversity Heritage Library NamebankID: 3857603
- Catalogue of Life Accepted Name Code: Fis-31577
- Fishbase Species ID: 5909
- Global Biodiversity Information Facility Taxonkey: 13538471
