|Scientific Name:||Carcharhinus amboinensis|
|Species Authority:||(Müller & Henle, 1839)|
|Infra-specific Taxa Assessed:|
Carcharias amboinensis Müller & Henle, 1839
|Red List Category & Criteria:||Data Deficient ver 3.1|
|Reviewer/s:||Musick, J.A. & Fowler, S.L. (Shark Red List Authority)|
This assessment is based on the information published in the 2005 shark status survey (Fowler et al. 2005).
The Pigeye Shark (Carcharhinus 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, especially the Bull Shark (C. leucas). Where fisheries data are available, this species constitutes a very small component of the catch, suggesting that it may not be common. Given its apparently sporadic distribution and low abundance, this shark may be unable to sustain heavy, localised fishing pressure. In the absence of further information, it is classified globally as Data Deficient. However, data are available from South Africa demonstrating a significant declining trend in catches, hence the Near Threatened assessment for the Southwest Indian Ocean Subpopulation.
|Range Description:||The Pigeye Shark is sporadically distributed in tropical and subtropical waters of the Indo-West Pacific Ocean, including the east coast of southern Africa, Madagascar, Gulf of Aden, Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, Indonesia and northern Australia (Bass et al. 1973, Compagno 1984, Last and Stevens 1994). Compagno (1984) indicates several localities in the Indo-West Pacific where its suspected occurrence awaits confirmation. It also occurs in Nigeria (Compagno 1984). This species inhabits coastal waters, usually close to the bottom. It also occasionally enters brackish water (Last and Stevens 1994).|
Native:Australia; India; Indonesia; Madagascar; Mozambique; Nigeria; Pakistan; Somalia; South Africa; Sri Lanka; Yemen
|FAO Marine Fishing Areas:||
Atlantic – eastern central; Indian Ocean – eastern; Indian Ocean – western; Pacific – southwest; Pacific – western central
|Range Map:||Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.|
|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.
This species is caught in small numbers for its meat and fins in the Northern Shark Fishery which comprises longlining and pelagic and demersal gillnetting off northern Australia (Stevens and McLoughlin 1991, Last and Stevens 1994, McLoughlin et al. 1994). The Northern Pelagic Fish Stock Programme sampled in this fishing area with similar gear between January 1984?May 1985 and found that C. amboinensis comprised 0.5% of the pelagic gillnet and 3.5% of the longline catch of sharks (Bentley 1996).
Pigeye Shark 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. Immature sharks dominated the catches in all the above fisheries, and mature sharks may occur to the north of the netted region in this area.
|Conservation Actions:||Given the low incidence of this species in commercial catches, there are no known conservation and management initiatives.|
Bass, A.J., D'Aubrey, J.D. and Kistnasamy, N. 1973. Sharks of the east coast of southern Africa. I. The genus Carcharhinus (Carcharhinidae). South African Association for Marine Biological Research. Oceanographic Research Institute. Oceanographic Research Institute. Investigational Reports.
Bentley, N. 1996. Australian overview. The World Trade in Sharks: a Compendium of TRAFFIC?s regional studies. Volume II, pp. 661?749. TRAFFIC Network, Cambridge, UK.
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.
Compagno, L.J.V. 1984. Sharks of the World. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of shark species to date. Part II (Carcharhiniformes). FAO Fisheries Synopsis, FAO, Rome.
Fourmanoir, P. 1961. Requins de la Côte Ouest de Madagascar. Memoires de L?Institut Scientifique de Madagascar. Série F. Oceanographie. ORSTOM. Tome IV.
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/.
Last, P.R. and Stevens, J.D. 1994. Sharks and Rays of Australia. CSIRO, Melbourne, Australia.
McLoughlin, K., Slack-Smith, R. and Stevens, J. 1994. Northern shark. In: In K. McLoughlin, D. Staples and M. Maliel, eds. (eds), Fishery Status Reports 1993 ? Resource Assessments of Australian Commonwealth Fisheries, pp. 31?36. Bureau of Resource Sciences, Canberra, Australia.
Stevens, J. D. and McLoughlin, K.J. 1991. Distribution, size and sex composition, reproductive biology and diet of sharks from northern Australia. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 42: 151?199.
|Citation:||Cliff, G. 2009. Carcharhinus amboinensis. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.2. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 20 April 2014.|
|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|