Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Behavioral electrosensitivity increases with size in the sandbar shark, Carcharhinus plumbeus

  • Published:
Environmental Biology of Fishes Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

During elasmobranch ontogeny, increasing body size has been proposed to result in a tradeoff between increased sensitivity and decreased spatial resolution of the electrosensory system, but this hypothesis has not previously been tested. Further, the sensitivity of the electrosensory system has not been examined in any large sharks. In the present study, we examined the behavioral electrosensitivity of large (likely adult) sandbar sharks to prey-simulating electric fields, compared with previously published results for small (juvenile) sandbar sharks. We found that the large sandbar sharks, which were approximately three times larger than the small juveniles previously tested, had lower minimum (0.002 nV/cm) and median (0.5 nV/cm) response thresholds. These represent the lowest sensitivity thresholds of any elasmobranch studied to date. Since electric field detection plays an important role in feeding behavior, increases in sensitivity of the electrosensory system and the corresponding increase in electric field detection distance with growth may be linked to ontogenetic dietary changes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding authors on reasonable request.

References

  • Aadland CR (1992) Anatomical observation and description of the ampullae of Lorenzini in the shortfin mako shark Isurus oxyrinchus. MS Thesis, Bucknell University

  • Atkinson CJL, Bottaro M (2006) Ampullary pore distribution of Galeus melastomus and Etmopterus spinax: possible relations with predatory lifestyle and habitat. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 86:447–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball RE, Oliver MK, Gill AB (2016) Early life sensory ability - ventilatory responses of thornback ray embryos (Raja clavata) to predator-type electric fields. Dev Neurobiol 76(7):721–729

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baremore IE, Hale LF (2012) Reproduction of the sandbar shark in the western North Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. Mar Coast Fish 4(1):560–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bedore CN, Kajiura SM (2013) Bioelectric fields of marine organisms: voltage and frequency contributions to detectability by electroreceptive predators. Physiol Biochem Zool 86(3):298–311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bedore CN, Harris LJ, Kajiura SM (2014) Behavioral responses of batoid elasmobranchs to prey-simulating electric fields are correlated to peripheral sensory morphology and ecology. Zoology 117(2):95–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett MVL (1971) Electroreception. In: Hoar WS, Randall DJ (eds) Fish Physiology, vol 5. Academic Press, New York, pp 493–574

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodznick D, Montgomery JC (1992) Suppression of ventilatory reference in the elasmobranch electrosensory system: medullary neuron receptive fields support a common mode rejection mechanism. J Exp Biol 171:127–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodznick D, Schmidt AW (1984) Somatotopy within the medullary electrosensory nucleus of the little skate, Raja erinacea. J Comp Neurol 225:581–590

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bodznick D, Montgomery J, Tricas TC (2003) Electroreception: extracting behaviorally important signals from noise. In: Collin SP, Marshall JN (eds) Sensory Processing in Aquatic Environments. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 389–403

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Broun GR, Il’inskii OB, Krylov BV (1979) Responses of the ampullae of Lorenzini in a uniform electric field. Neurophysiology 11:118–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown BR (2002) Modeling an electrosensory landscape: behavioral and morphological optimization in elasmobranch prey capture. J Exp Biol 205:999–1007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brown BR, Hughes ME, Russo C (2005) Infrastructure in the electric sense: admittance data from shark hydrogels. J Comp Physiol A 191:115–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camilieri-Asch V, Kempster RM, Collin SP, Johnstone RW, Theiss SM (2013) A comparison of the electrosensory morphology of a euryhaline and a marine stingray. Zoology 116:270–276

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Camperi M, Tricas TC, Brown BR (2007) From morphology to neural information: the electric sense of the skate. PLoS Comput Biol 3(6):e113

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Chu YT, Wen MC (1979) Monograph of fishes of China (No. 2): a study of the lateral-line canals system and that of Lorenzini ampullae and tubules of elasmobranchiate fishes of China. Science and Technology Press, Shanghai

    Google Scholar 

  • Cliff G, Dudley SFJ, Davis B (1988) Sharks caught in the protective gill nets off Natal, South Africa. 1. The sandbar shark Carcharhinus plumbeus (Nardo). S Afr J Mar Sci 7:255–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collin SP, Whitehead D (2004) The functional roles of passive electroreception in non-electric fishes. Anim Biol 54(1):1–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coombs S, Grossman GD (2006) Mechanosensory based orienting behaviors in fluvial and lacustrine populations of mottled sculpin (Cottus bairdi). Mar Freshw Behav Physiol 39(2):113–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crooks N, Waring CP (2013) A study into the sexual dimorphisms of the ampullae of Lorenzini in the lesser-spotted catshark, Scyliorhinus canicula (Linnaeus, 1758). Environ Biol Fish 96:585–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crooks N (2011) Sexual and seasonal dimorphisms in the dermal, dental, and ampullary structures of the lesser-spotted catshark, Scyliorhinus canicula. PhD Dissertation, University of Portsmouth

  • Ellis JK, Musick JA (2007) Ontogenetic changes in the diet of the sandbar shark, Carcharhinus plumbeus, in lower Chesapeake Bay and Virginia (USA) coastal waters. Environ Biol Fish 80:51–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fouts WR, Nelson DR (1999) Prey capture by the Pacific angle shark, Squatina californica: visually mediated strikes and ambush-site characteristics. Copeia 1999(2):304–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner JM, Atema J, Hueter RE, Motta PJ (2014) Multisensory integration and behavioral plasticity in sharks from different ecological niches. PLoS ONE 9(4):e93036

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner JM, Atema J, Hueter RE, Motta PJ (2017) Modulation of shark prey capture kinematics in response to sensory deprivation. Zoology 120:42–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gauthier ARG, Whitehead DL, Tibbetts IR, Cribb W, Bennett MB (2018) Morphological comparison of the ampullae of Lorenzini of three sympatric benthic rays. J Fish Biol 92:504–514

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gauthier ARG, Whitehead DL, Tibbetts IR, Bennett MB (2019) Comparative morphology of the electrosensory system of the epaulette shark Hemiscyllium ocellatum and brown-banded bamboo shark Chiloscyllium punctatum. J Fish Biol 94:313–319

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haine OS, Ridd PV, Rowe RJ (2001) Range of electrosensory detection of prey by Carcharhinus melanopterus and Himantura granulata. Mar Freshw Res 52:291–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hale LF, Baremore IE (2013) Age and growth of the sandbar shark (Carcharhinus plumbeus) from the Northern Gulf of Mexico and western North Atlantic Ocean. Gulf Mex Sci 31(1–2):28–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris LJ, Bedore CN, Kajiura SM (2015) Electroreception in the obligate freshwater stingray, Potamotrygon motoro. Mar Freshw Res 66:1027–1036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CS, Scronce BL, McManus MW (1984) Detection of DC electric dipoles in background fields by the nurse shark. J Comp Physiol A 155:681–687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan LK, Kajiura SM, Gordon MS (2009a) Functional consequences of structural differences in stingray sensory systems. Part I: mechanosensory lateral line canals. J Exp Biol 212:3037–3043

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan LK, Kajiura SM, Gordon MS (2009b) Functional consequences of structural differences in stingray sensory systems. Part II: electrosensory system. J Exp Biol 212:3044–3050

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan LK, Mandelman JW, Kajiura SM (2011) Behavioral responses to weak electric fields and a lanthanide metal in two shark species. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 409:345–350

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kajiura SM (2001a) Electroreception in carcharhinid and sphyrnid sharks. PhD Dissertation, University of Hawai'i

  • Kajiura SM (2001b) Head morphology and electrosensory pore distribution of carcharhinid and sphyrnid sharks. Environ Biol Fish 61(2):125–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kajiura SM (2003) Electroreception in neonatal bonnethead sharks, Sphyrna tiburo. Mar Biol 143(3):603–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kajiura SM, Fitzgerald TP (2009) Response of juvenile scalloped hammerhead sharks to electric stimuli. Zoology 112:241–250

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kajiura SM, Holland KN (2002) Electroreception in juvenile scalloped hammerhead and sandbar sharks. J Exp Biol 205(23):3609–3621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kajiura SM, Sebastian AP, Tricas TC (2000) Dermal bite wounds as indicators of reproductive seasonality and behaviour in the Atlantic stingray, Dasyatis sabina. Environ Biol Fish 58:23–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalmijn AJ (1971) The electric sense of sharks and rays. J Exp Biol 55(2):371–383

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kalmijn AJ (1972) Bioelectric fields in seawater and the function of the ampullae of Lorenzini in elasmobranch fishes. Scripps Inst Oceanogr Ref Ser 72–83:1–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalmijn AJ (1974) The detection of electric fields from inanimate and animate sources other than electric organs. In: Fessard A (ed) Handbook of Sensory Physiology, vol III. Springer-Verlag, New York, N.Y., pp 147–200

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalmijn AJ (1982) Electric and magnetic field detection in elasmobranch fishes. Science 218:916–918

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kalmijn AJ (1988) Detection of weak electric fields. In: Atema J, Fay RR, Popper AN, Tavolga WN (eds) Sensory Biology of Aquatic Animals. Springer-Verlag, New York, N.Y., pp 151–186

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kalmijn AJ (1997) Electric and near-field acoustic detection, a comparative study. Acta Physiol Scand 161:25–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalmijn AJ (2000) Detection and processing of electromagnetic and near-field acoustic signals in elasmobranch fishes. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 3555:1135–1141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kempster RM, McCarthy ID, Collin SP (2012) Phylogenetic and ecological factors influencing the number and distribution of electroreceptors in elasmobranchs. J Fish Biol 80:2055–2088

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kempster RM, Garza-Gisholt E, Egeberg CA, Hart NS, O’Shea OR, Collin SP (2013a) Sexual dimorphism of the electrosensory system: a quantitative analysis of nerve axons in the dorsal anterior lateral line nerve of the blue-spotted fantail stingray (Taeniura lymma). Brain Behav Evol 81:226–235

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kempster RM, Hart NS, Collin SP (2013b) Survival of the stillest: predator avoidance in shark embryos. PLoS ONE 8(1):e52551

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kempster RM, Egeberg CA, Hart NS, Collin SP (2016) Electrosensory-driven feeding behaviours of the Port Jackson shark (Heterodontus portusjacksoni) and western shovelnose ray (Aptychotrema vincentiana). Mar Freshw Res 67:187–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuznetsova A, Brockhoff P, Christensen R (2017) lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. J Stat Softw 82(13):1–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marzullo TA, Wueringer BE, Squire L, Collin SP (2011) Description of the mechanoreceptive lateral line and electroreceptive ampullary systems in the freshwater whipray, Himantura dalyensis. Mar Freshw Res 62(6):771–779

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McElroy WD, Wetherbee BM, Mostello CS, Lowe CG, Crow GL, Wass RC (2006) Food habits and ontogenetic changes in the diet of the sandbar shark, Carcharhinus plumbeus, in Hawaii. Environ Biol Fish 76:81–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGowan DW, Kajiura SM (2009) Electroreception in the euryhaline stingray, Dasyatis sabina. J Exp Biol 212:1544–1552

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Medved RJ, Stillwell CE, Casey JJ (1985) Stomach contents of young sandbar sharks, Carcharhinus plumbeus, in Chincoteague Bay, Virginia. Fish Bull Fish Wildl Serv 83(3):395–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery JC (1984) Frequency response characteristics of primary and secondary neurons in the electrosensory system of the thornback ray. Comp Biochem Physiol 79A:189–915

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore DM, McCarthy ID (2014) Distribution of ampullary pores on three catshark species (Apristurus spp.) suggest a vertical-ambush predatory behaviour. Aquat Biol 21:261–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray RW (1965) Receptor mechanisms in the ampullae of Lorenzini in elasmobranch fishes. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 30:233–243

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Murray RW (1974) The ampullae of Lorenzini. In: Fessard A (ed) Handbook of Sensory Physiology, vol III. Springer-Verlag, New York, N.Y

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray RW, Potts TW (1961) The composition of the endolymph, and other body fluids of elasmobranchs. Comp Biochem Physiol 2:65–75

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt HL (1979) Reproduction in the blue shark, Prionace glauca. Fish Bull 77(2):445–470

    Google Scholar 

  • Raschi W (1974) Notes on the gross functional morphology of the ampullary system in two similar species of skates, Raja erinacea and R. ocellata. Copeia 1978(1):48–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raschi W (1986) A morphological analysis of the ampullae of Lorenzini in selected skates (Pisces, Rajoidei). J Morphol 189:225–247

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Raschi W, Adams WH (1988) Depth-related modifications in the electroreceptive system of the eurybathic skate, Raja radiata (Chondrichthyes: Rajidae). Copeia 1988(1):116–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raschi WG, Aadlond C, Keithar ED (2001) A morphological and functional analysis of the ampullae of Lorenzini in selected galeoid sharks. In: Kapoor BG, Hara TJ (eds) Sensory Biology of Jawed Fishes: New Insights. Science Publishers, Enfield, New Hampshire, pp 297–316

    Google Scholar 

  • Raschi WG (1984) Anatomical observations on the ampullae of Lorenzini from selected skates and galeoid sharks of the western north Atlantic. PhD Dissertation, The College of William and Mary

  • Rechisky EL, Wetherbee BM (2003) Short-term movements of juvenile and neonate sandbar sharks, Carcharhinus plumbeus, on their nursery grounds in Delaware Bay. Environ Biol Fish 68:113–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivera-Vicente AC, Sewell J, Tricas TC (2011) Electrosensitive spatial vectors in elasmobranch fishes: implications for source localization. PLoS ONE 6(1):e6008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan LA, Meeuwig JJ, Hemmi JM, Collin SP, Hart NS (2015) It is not just size that matters: shark cruising speeds are species-specific. Mar Biol 162:1307–1318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryer CH, von Montfrans J, Moody KE (1997) Cannibalism, refugia and the molting blue crab. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 147:77–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SEDAR (2017) SEDAR 54 - HMS Sandbar Shark Stock Assessment Report. SEDAR, North Charleston, SC. 128 pages

  • Shiffman DS, Frazier BS, Kucklick JR, Abel D, Brandes J, Sancho G (2014) Feeding ecology of the sandbar shark in South Carolina estuaries revealed through δ13C and δ15N stable isotope analysis. Mar Coast Fish 6:156–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sisneros JA, Tricas TC (2000) Androgen-induced changes in the response dynamics of ampullary electrosensory primary afferent neurons. J Neurosci 20:8586–8595

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Sisneros JA, Tricas TC (2002) Ontogenetic changes in the response properties of the peripheral electrosensory system in the Atlantic stingray (Dasyatis sabina). Brain Behav Evol 59:130–140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sisneros JA, Tricas TC, Luer CA (1998) Response properties and biological function of the skate electrosensory system during ontogeny. J Comp Physiol A 183:87–99

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens JD, McLoughlin KJ (1991) Distribution, size and sex composition, reproductive biology, and diet of sharks from Northern Australia. Aus J Mar Freshw Res 42:151–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stillwell CE, Kohler NE (1993) Food habits of the sandbar shark Carcharhinus plumbeus off the U.S. northeast coast, with estimates of daily ration. Fish Bull Fish Wildl Serv 91:138–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Team RC (2019) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. 3.6.1 edn. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria

  • Theiss SM, Collin SP, Hart NS (2011) Morphology and distribution of the ampullary electroreceptors in wobbegong sharks: implications for feeding behaviour. Mar Biol 158:723–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tricas TC (2001) The neuroecology of the elasmobranch electrosensory world: why peripheral morphology shapes behavior. Environ Biol Fish 60:77–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tricas TC, New JG (1998) Sensitivity and response dynamics of elasmobranch electrosensory primary afferent neurons to near threshold fields. J Comp Physiol A 182:89–101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tricas TC, Michael SW, Sisneros JA (1995) Electrosensory optimization to conspecific phasic signals for mating. Neurosci Lett 202:129–132

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Waltman B (1966) Electrical properties and fine structure of the ampullary canals of Lorenzini. Acta Physiol Scand 66(suppl. 264):1–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams DL, Modla S, Roer RD, Dillaman RM (2009) Post-ecdysial change in the permeability of the exoskeleton of the blue crab, Callinectes sapidus. J Crustacean Biol 29(4):550–555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winther-Janson M, Wueringer BE, Seymour JE (2012) Electroreceptive and mechanoreceptive anatomical specialisations in the epaulette shark (Hemiscyllium ocellatum). PLoS ONE 7(11):e49857

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wueringer BE, Tibbetts IR (2008) Comparison of the lateral line and ampullary systems of two species of shovelnose ray. Rev Fish Biol Fish 18:47–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wueringer BE, Peverell SC, Seymour J, Squire L, Kajiura SM, Collin SP (2011) Sensory systems in sawfishes: 1. The ampullae of Lorenzini. Brain Behav Evol 78(2):139–149

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wueringer BE, Squire L, Kajiura SM, Tibbetts IR, Hart NS, Collin SP (2012) Electric field detection in sawfish and shovelnose rays. PLoS ONE 7(7):e41605

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the New York Aquarium for allowing us to conduct research on their animals and Mote Marine Laboratory’s Center for Shark Research, particularly J. Morris and CSR interns, for overseeing animal husbandry and providing logistical assistance with experiments. We also thank M. Crowe for assistance with statistical analyses. L.M.C. and C.J.E. were supported by Mote-REU USFSM internships. REH was supported by the Perry W. Gilbert Chair in Shark Research at Mote Marine Laboratory and by OCEARCH. This manuscript is based on work done by JMG while serving at the National Science Foundation. Any opinion, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessary reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Lisa M. Crawford

    Present address: Stony Brook University, 100 Nicolls Rd, Stony Brook, NY, 11794, USA

  2. Charles J. Edelson

    Present address: Indiana University Bloomington, 107 S Indiana Ave, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA

  3. Robert E. Hueter

    Present address: OCEARCH, 1790 Bonanza Dr, Park City, UT, 84060, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. New College of Florida, 5800 Bay Shore Rd, Sarasota, FL, 34243, USA

    Lisa M. Crawford, Charles J. Edelson & Jayne M. Gardiner

  2. Mote Marine Laboratory, 1600 Ken Thompson Pkwy, Sarasota, FL, 34236, USA

    Robert E. Hueter

Authors
  1. Lisa M. Crawford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Charles J. Edelson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert E. Hueter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jayne M. Gardiner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

L.M.C. and C.J.E. collected and analyzed data, and prepared the manuscript. R.E.H. provided facility support and assisted with manuscript preparation and revision. J.M.G. conceived the study, oversaw data collection and analysis, and assisted with manuscript preparation and revision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jayne M. Gardiner.

Ethics declarations

Ethical statement

Animals were originally obtained from federal waters near the Florida Keys in accordance with National Marine Fisheries Service permit number SHK-DISPLAY-14–01. This study was carried out in accordance with protocols approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees at the University of South Florida (IS00000751) and Mote Marine Laboratory (14–08-JG5). The study is reported in accordance with ARRIVE guidelines.

Competing interests

Dr. Jayne Gardiner is on the Editorial Board of this journal, but she was not involved in the peer review of this article and had no access to information regarding its peer review. The authors declare no other competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 A single turn approach and bite on the electrically active (right) dipole by sandbar shark CP3. The turn was initiated from a distance of 28 cm (from the center of the dipole to the closest point on the head) and an angle of 23° to the dipole axis, at a calculated field strength of 1.5 nV/cm. (MP4 12764 KB)

Supplementary file2 A straight approach and bite on the electrically active (left) dipole by sandbar shark CP2. Because there is no change in trajectory within the field of view of the camera, the response distance for straight approaches cannot be determined. (MP4 14646 KB)

Supplementary file3 A spiral approach and bite on the electrically active (left) dipole by sandbar shark CP4. The final turn prior to the bite was initiated from 83 cm (from the center of the dipole to the closest point on the head) and an angle of 116° to the dipole axis, at a calculated field strength of 0.03 nV/cm. (MP4 12522 KB)

Supplementary file4 An overshoot approach and bite on the electrically active (right) dipole by sandbar shark CP4. The turn was initiated from 94 cm (from the center of the dipole to the closest point on the head) and an angle of 93° to the dipole axis, at a calculated field strength of 0.002 nV/cm. (MP4 14646 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Crawford, L.M., Edelson, C.J., Hueter, R.E. et al. Behavioral electrosensitivity increases with size in the sandbar shark, Carcharhinus plumbeus. Environ Biol Fish 107, 257–273 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10641-024-01514-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10641-024-01514-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation