Advertisement

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 45–54 | Cite as

Diel movement patterns of the scalloped hammerhead shark (Sphyrna lewini) in relation to El Bajo Espiritu Santo: a refuging central-position social system

  • A. Peter Klimley
  • Donald R. Nelson
Article

Summary

Movement patterns of scalloped hammerhead sharks in the vicinity of El Bajo Espiritu Santo, a seamount in the Gulf of California, were determined by tracking by ultrasonic telemetry 13 sharks and marking 100 sharks. The 13 tracked sharks swam back and forth along the seamount ridge throughout the day. They did not swim in different directions to reduce swimming effort when currents changed from a parallel to a perpendicular orientation to the ridge. Sharks tracked up to 8 km away into the pelagic environment soon returned to the seamount. From such trackings and repeated observations of marked sharks over periods of several weeks, it is believed that most sharks disperse and return to the seamount in a rhythmical fashion. The separate departures of individual hammerheads in five paired trackings indicated that the sharks left the seamount either in small groups or singly. For these reasons, we argue that the social system of the scalloped hammerhead shark can be described as a refuging system.

Keywords

Social System Small Group Movement Pattern Perpendicular Orientation Pelagic Environment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Batschelet E (1965) Statistical methods for the analysis of problems in animal orientation and certain biological rhythms. A.I.B.S. Monograph, American Institute for Biological Sciences, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  2. Hamilton WJ, Watt KE (1970) Refuging. In: Johnston RF, Frank PW, Michener CD (eds) Annu Rev Ecol Syst 1:263–287Google Scholar
  3. Hayne DW (1949) Calculation of size of home range. J Mammal 39:190–206Google Scholar
  4. Johnson RH (1978) Sharks of polynesia. Les Editions de Pacifique, PapeeteGoogle Scholar
  5. Klimley AP (1982a) Grouping behavior in the scalloped hammerhead. Oceanus 24:65–71Google Scholar
  6. Klimley AP (1982 b) Social organization of schools of the scalloped hammerhead, Sphyrna lewini (Griffith and Smith), in the Gulf of California. Dissertation, University of CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  7. Klimley AP, Nelson DR (1981) Schooling of the scalloped hammerhead shark, Sphyrna lewini, in the Gulf of California. Fish Bull 79:356–360Google Scholar
  8. McLaughlin RH, O'Gower AK (1971) Life history of underwater activities of a heterodont shark. Ecol Monogr 41:271–289Google Scholar
  9. Nelson DR, Johnson RH (1980) Behavior of the reef sharks of Rangiroa, French Polynesia. Natl Geogr Res Rep 12:479–499Google Scholar
  10. Nelson DR, McKibben JN (1981) Time release, recoverable ultrasonic/radio transmitter for tracking pelagic sharks. In: Long PM (ed) Proceedings of the third international conference of wildlife biotelemetry. ICWB, Laramie pp 90–104Google Scholar
  11. Randall JE (1977) Contribution to the biology of the whitetip reef shark (Triaenodon obesus). Pac Sci 3:145–164Google Scholar
  12. Southwood TRE (1978) Ecological methods. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Peter Klimley
    • 1
  • Donald R. Nelson
    • 2
  1. 1.Marine Biology Research Division (A-002), Scripps Institution of OceanographyUniversity of CaliforniaLa JollaUSA
  2. 2.California State UniversityLong BeachUSA

Personalised recommendations