Carcharhinus amboinensis (Southwest Indian Ocean subpopulation)

Taxonomy

Assessment Information

Geographic Range

Population

Habitat and Ecology

Threats

Conservation Actions

Bibliography

View Printer Friendly

Taxonomy [top]

Kingdom	Phylum	Class	Order	Family
ANIMALIA	CHORDATA	CHONDRICHTHYES	CARCHARHINIFORMES	CARCHARHINIDAE

Scientific Name:

Carcharhinus amboinensis (Southwest Indian Ocean subpopulation)

Species Authority:

(Müller & Henle, 1839)

Common Name/s:

English

–

Java Shark, Pigeye Shark

Assessment Information [top]

Red List Category & Criteria:

Near Threatened ver 3.1

Year Published:

2009

Assessor/s:

Cliff, G.

Reviewer/s:

Musick, J.A. & Fowler, S.L. (Shark Red List Authority)

Justification:
This assessment is based on information in the 2005 shark status survey (Fowler et al. 2005).

Pigeye Shark (C. amboinensis) is sporadically distributed in the Indo-West Pacific, which may, in part, be due to an inability to distinguish it from other members of the genus Carcharhinus. Where fisheries data are available, this species constitutes a very small component of the catch, suggesting that it may not be common. Natal Sharks Board data demonstrate a significant declining trend in catches from 1978–98, and a decrease in mean length in the southwest Indian Ocean. The apparently sporadic distribution and low abundance of this shark suggests that it may be unable to sustain heavy, localised fishing pressure, and shark fisheries are intensifying in the Indo-Pacific.

History:

2000

–

Lower Risk/near threatened

Geographic Range [top]

Range Description:	This subpopulation occurs in the Southwest Indian Ocean from Madagascar, Mozambique and South Africa.
Countries:	Native: Madagascar; Mozambique; South Africa
FAO Marine Fishing Areas:	Native: Indian Ocean – western
Range Map:	Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.

Population [top]

Population Trend:	Unknown

Population Trend:

Unknown

Habitat and Ecology [top]

Habitat and Ecology:	The following information, unless otherwise acknowledged, is based on studies by Stevens and McLoughlin (1991) in northern Australia and Cliff and Dudley (1991) in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Males mature at about 210 cm and females at 215–220 cm. The largest Australian individuals were a 231 cm male and a 242 cm female; in South Africa they were a 238 cm male and a 245 cm female. Fourmanoir (1961) recorded a 280 cm female from west Madagascar. Size at birth is 60–75 cm. In Australia the largest embryo was 59 cm and the smallest free-swimming individual was 66 cm. In South Africa the smallest free-swimming individual was 75 cm (Bass et al. 1973) and the largest embryo 79 cm. These findings imply that there may be a regional difference in size at birth. Litter sizes range from 3–13, averaging five in South Africa and nine in Australia. In South Africa gestation appears to be about 12 months, with mating in January–February and term embryos found in December–January. Five out of eight South African mature females were pregnant. Data from Australia indicated a nine-month gestation, with birth in November–December. In both studies males and females were sampled in equal numbers. In South Africa, the Pigeye Shark feeds on teleosts (62% frequency of occurrence), elasmobranchs (45%), crustaceans (13%) and cephalopods (12%). Most of the prey were demersal, associated with soft bottoms; Australian sharks had similar diets. Tag returns from juveniles in Australia indicated that their movements are relatively localised (up to 60 km), while two larger sharks moved 240 and 1,080 km (Last and Stevens 1994). On the east coast of South Africa, two tagged sharks were recaptured after 76 and 320 days, 23 and 84 km from their respective tagging localities. Based on catches in the nets that protect the swimming beaches of KwaZulu-Natal, this species is often solitary and does not appear to swim in large packs. No information is available on age and growth.
Systems:	Marine

Habitat and Ecology:

The following information, unless otherwise acknowledged, is based on studies by Stevens and McLoughlin (1991) in northern Australia and Cliff and Dudley (1991) in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

Males mature at about 210 cm and females at 215–220 cm. The largest Australian individuals were a 231 cm male and a 242 cm female; in South Africa they were a 238 cm male and a 245 cm female. Fourmanoir (1961) recorded a 280 cm female from west Madagascar. Size at birth is 60–75 cm. In Australia the largest embryo was 59 cm and the smallest free-swimming individual was 66 cm. In South Africa the smallest free-swimming individual was 75 cm (Bass et al. 1973) and the largest embryo 79 cm. These findings imply that there may be a regional difference in size at birth. Litter sizes range from 3–13, averaging five in South Africa and nine in Australia. In South Africa gestation appears to be about 12 months, with mating in January–February and term embryos found in December–January. Five out of eight South African mature females were pregnant. Data from Australia indicated a nine-month gestation, with birth in November–December. In both studies males and females were sampled in equal numbers.

In South Africa, the Pigeye Shark feeds on teleosts (62% frequency of occurrence), elasmobranchs (45%), crustaceans (13%) and cephalopods (12%). Most of the prey were demersal, associated with soft bottoms; Australian sharks had similar diets. Tag returns from juveniles in Australia indicated that their movements are relatively localised (up to 60 km), while two larger sharks moved 240 and 1,080 km (Last and Stevens 1994). On the east coast of South Africa, two tagged sharks were recaptured after 76 and 320 days, 23 and 84 km from their respective tagging localities. Based on catches in the nets that protect the swimming beaches of KwaZulu-Natal, this species is often solitary and does not appear to swim in large packs. No information is available on age and growth.

Systems:

Marine

Threats [top]

Major Threat(s):	This species constituted 0.5 % (16 specimens) of the annual shark catch in the nets protecting swimming beaches in KwaZulu-Natal. The catch rate fluctuated at about 0.4 sharks per km of net per year between 1978–1990; data from the early years of this fishery (1952–1977) are not available. Richards Bay, the northernmost netted beach, where nets were introduced in 1981, had the highest catch of this species (annual average six, range 0–25). At this locality there was a significant decline in catch rates (Cliff and Dudley 1991), suggesting highly localised depletion.

Major Threat(s):

This species constituted 0.5 % (16 specimens) of the annual shark catch in the nets protecting swimming beaches in KwaZulu-Natal. The catch rate fluctuated at about 0.4 sharks per km of net per year between 1978–1990; data from the early years of this fishery (1952–1977) are not available. Richards Bay, the northernmost netted beach, where nets were introduced in 1981, had the highest catch of this species (annual average six, range 0–25). At this locality there was a significant decline in catch rates (Cliff and Dudley 1991), suggesting highly localised depletion.

Conservation Actions [top]

Conservation Actions:	There are no known conservation and management initiatives.

Conservation Actions:

There are no known conservation and management initiatives.

Bibliography [top]

	Cliff, G. and Dudley, S.F.J. 1991. Sharks caught in the protective nets off Natal, South Africa. 5. Java shark Carcharhinus amboinensis (Müller and Henle). South African Journal of Marine Science 11: 443–453. Fowler, S.L., Cavanagh, R.D., Camhi, M., Burgess, G.H., Cailliet, G.M., Fordham, S.V., Simpfendorfer, C.A. and Musick, J.A. (comps and eds). 2005. Sharks, Rays and Chimaeras: The Status of the Chondrichthyan Fishes. Status Survey. pp. x + 461. IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. IUCN. 2009. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (ver. 2009.2). Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 3 November 2009). IUCN SSC Shark Specialist Group. Specialist Group website. Available at: http://www.iucnssg.org/. Shark Specialist Group. 2000. IUCN Shark Specialist Group Red List Assessments, 2000 (unpublished report).

Cliff, G. and Dudley, S.F.J. 1991. Sharks caught in the protective nets off Natal, South Africa. 5. Java shark Carcharhinus amboinensis (Müller and Henle). South African Journal of Marine Science 11: 443–453.

Fowler, S.L., Cavanagh, R.D., Camhi, M., Burgess, G.H., Cailliet, G.M., Fordham, S.V., Simpfendorfer, C.A. and Musick, J.A. (comps and eds). 2005. Sharks, Rays and Chimaeras: The Status of the Chondrichthyan Fishes. Status Survey. pp. x + 461. IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

IUCN. 2009. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (ver. 2009.2). Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 3 November 2009).

IUCN SSC Shark Specialist Group. Specialist Group website. Available at: http://www.iucnssg.org/.

Shark Specialist Group. 2000. IUCN Shark Specialist Group Red List Assessments, 2000 (unpublished report).

Citation:	Cliff, G. 2009. Carcharhinus amboinensis (Southwest Indian Ocean subpopulation). In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 25 May 2012.
Disclaimer:	To make use of this information, please check the <Terms of Use>.
Feedback:	If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please fill in the feedback form so that we can correct or extend the information provided