Genetic evidence of cryptic speciation within hammerhead sharks (Genus Sphyrna)

Abstract

Surveys of genetic variation within cosmopolitan marine species often uncover deep divergences, indicating historical separation and potentially cryptic speciation. Based on broad geographic (coastal eastern North America, Gulf of Mexico, western Africa, Australia, and Hawaii) and temporal sampling (1991–2003), mitochondrial (control region [CR] and cytochrome oxidase I [COI]) and nuclear gene (lactate dehydrogenase A intron 6 [LDHA6]) variation among 76 individuals was used to test for cryptic speciation in the scalloped hammerhead, Sphyrna lewini (Griffith and Smith). CR and COI gene trees confirmed previous evidence of divergence between Atlantic and Indo-Pacific scalloped hammerhead populations; populations were reciprocally monophyletic. However, the between-basin divergence recorded in the mtDNA genome was not reflected in nuclear gene phylogenies; alleles for LDHA6 were shared between ocean basins, and Atlantic and Indo-Pacific populations were not reciprocally monophyletic. Unexpectedly, CR, COI, and LDHA6 gene trees recovered a deep phylogenetic partition within the Atlantic samples. For mtDNA haplotypes, which segregated by basin, average genetic distances were higher among Atlantic haplotypes (CR: D HKY=0.036, COI: D GTR=0.016) than among Indo-Pacific haplotypes (CR: D HKY=0.010, COI: D GTR=0.006) and approximated divergences between basins for CR (D HKY=0.036 within Atlantic; D HKY=0.042 between basins). Vertebral counts for eight specimens representing divergent lineages from the western north Atlantic were consistent with the genetic data. Coexistence of discrete lineages in the Atlantic, complete disequilibrium between nuclear and mitochondrial alleles within lineages and concordant partitions in genetic and morphological characters indicates reproductive isolation and thus the occurrence of a cryptic species of scalloped hammerhead in the western north Atlantic. Effective management of large coastal shark species should incorporate this important discovery and the inference from sampling that the cryptic scalloped hammerhead is less abundant than S. lewini, making it potentially more susceptible to fishery pressure.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Abercrombie DL, Clarke SC, Shivji MS (2005) Global-scale genetic identification of hammerhead sharks: application to assessment of the international fin trade and law enforcement. Conserv Genet (in press)

  2. Avise JC, Ball RM (1990) Principles of genealogical concordance in species concepts and biological taxonomy. Oxford Surv Evol Biol 7:45–67

    Google Scholar 

  3. Baum JK, Myers RA, Kehler D, Gerber L, Blanchard W, Harley SJ (2002) Preliminary standardized catch rates for pelagic and large coastal sharks from logbook and observer data from the Northwest Atlantic. Col Vol Sci Pap ICCAT 54:1294–1313

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bermingham E, McCafferty SS, Martin AP (1999) Fish biogeography and molecular clocks: Perspectives from the Panamanian isthmus. In: Kocher TD, Stepien CA (eds) Molecular systematics of fishes. Academic, NewYork, pp 113–128

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bonfil R (1997) Status of shark resources in the Southern Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean: implications for management. Fish Res Amsterdam, 29:101–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Borsa P (2002) Allozyme, mitochondrial-DNA, and morphometric variability indicate cryptic species of anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus). Biol J Linnean Soc 75:261–269

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brown CA (1998) Standardized catch rates of four shark species in the Virginia–Massachusetts (U.S.) rod and reel fishery 1986–1997. SB-IV-5, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Center, Miami

  8. Campton DE, Bass AL, Chapman FA, Bowen BW (2000) Genetic distinction of pallid, shovelnose, and Alabama sturgeon: emerging species and the US Endangered Species Act. Conser Gen 1:17–32

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Castro JI, Woodley CM, Brudek RL (1999) A preliminary evaluation of the status of shark species. FAO Tech Pap 0 (380): I–iv;1–72

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Colborn J, Crabtree RE, Shaklee JB, Pfeiler E, Bowen BW (2001) The evolutionary enigma of bonefishes (Albula spp.): cryptic species and ancient separations in a globally distributed shorefish. Evolution 55: 807–820

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Compagno LJV (1984) FAO species catalogue, vol 4. Sharks of the world. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of shark species known to date. Part 1. Hexanchiformes to Lamniformes. United Nations Development Programme Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy

  12. Compagno LJV, Cook SF (1995) The exploitation and conservation of freshwater elasmobranchs: status of taxa and prospects for the future. J Aquariculture Aquat Sci 7:62–90

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cramer J (1998) Large pelagic logbook catch rates for sharks. SB-IV-II, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, Miami

  14. Dalebout ML, Mead JG, Baker CS, Baker AN, van Heldene AL (2002) A new species of beaked whale Mesoplodon perrini sp. N. (Cetacea: Ziphiidae) through phylogenetic analysis of DNA sequences. Mar Mammal Sci 18:577–608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dawson MN, Jacobs DK (2001) Molecular evidence for cryptic species of Aurelia aurita (Cnidaria, Scyphozoa). Biol Bull 200:92–96

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. de Vargas C, Norris R, Zaninetti L, Gibb SW, Pawlowski J (1999) Molecular evidence of cryptic speciation in planktonic foraminifers and their relation to oceanic provinces. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:2864–2868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dobzhansky T (1950) Mendelian populations and their evolution. Am Nat 84:401–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Eitner BJ (1995) Systematics of the genus Alopias (Lamniformes: Alopiidae) with evidence for the existence of an unrecognized species. Copeia 1995:562–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Etter RJ, Rex MA, Chase MC, Quatro JM (1999) A genetic dimension to deep-sea biodiversity. Deep Sea Res Part I Oceanog Res Pap 6:1095–1099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Farris JS, Källersjö M, Kluge AG, Bult C (1994) Testing significance of incongruence. Cladistics 10:315–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Farris JS, Källersjö M, Kluge AG, Bult C (1995) Constructing a significance test for incongruence. Syst Biol 44:570–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Felsenstein J (1981) Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximum likelihood approach. J Mol Evol 17:368–376

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Felsenstein J (1985) Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783–791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Fraser-Brunner A (1950) A synopsis of the hammerhead sharks (Sphyrna), with description of a new species. Rec Austral Mus 22(3):231–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Friesen VL, Piatt JF, Baker AJ (1996) Evidence from cytochrome b sequences and allozymes for a ‘new’ species of alcid: the longbilled murrelet (Brachyramphus perdix). Condor 98:681–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Garcia-Rodriguez AI, Bowen BW, Domning D, Mignucci-Giannoni A, Marmontel M, Montoya-Ospina A, Morales Vela B, Rudin M, Bonde RK, McGuire PM (1998) Phylogeography of the West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus): how many populations and how many taxa? Mol Ecol 7:1137–1149

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gardner MG, Ward RD (2002) Taxonomic affinities within Australian and New Zealand Mustelus sharks (Chondrichthyes: Triakidae) inferred from allozymes, mitochondrial DNA and precaudal vertebrae counts. Copeia 2002:356–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gilbert CR (1967) A revision of the hammerhead sharks (family Sphyrnidae). Proc US Nat Mus 119(3539)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Goldman N, (1993) Statistical tests of models of DNA substitution. J Mol Evol 36:182–198

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Grady JM, Quattro JM (1999) Using character concordance to define taxonomic and conservation units. Conserv Biol 13:1004–1007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hasegawa M, Kishino M, Yano T (1985) Dating the human-ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J Mol Evol 22:160–174

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Heemstra PC (1997) A review of the smooth-hound sharks (genus Mustelus, family Triakidae) of the western Atlantic Ocean, with description of two new species and a new subspecies. Bull Mar Sci 60:894–928

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hillis DM, Mable BK, Larson A, Davis SK, Zimmer EA (1996) Nucleic acids IV: sequencing and cloning. In: Hillis DM, Moritz C, Mable BK (eds) Molecular systematics. Sinauer Assoc, Inc., Sunderland, pp 321–381

    Google Scholar 

  34. Jordan DS (1908) The law of geminate species. Am Nat XLII(494):73–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kocher TD, Carleton KL (1999) Base substitution in fish mitochondrial DNA: patterns and rates. In: Kocher TD, Stepien CA (eds) Molecular systematics of fishes. Academic, NewYork, pp 13–24

    Google Scholar 

  36. Kotas JE (2002) IUCN red list of threatened species—Sphyrna lewini. In: 2002 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

  37. Last PR, Stevens JD (1994) Sharks and rays of Australia. CSIRO, Hobart

    Google Scholar 

  38. Lee CE (2000) Global phylogeography of a cryptic copepod species complex and reproductive isolation between genetically proximate “populations”. Evolution 54:2014–2027

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Maddison WP, Maddison DR (1992) McClade, version 3.0. Sinauer, Sunderland

    Google Scholar 

  40. Martin AP (1992) Application of mitochondrial DNA sequence analysis to the problem of species identification of sharks. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 115. National Technical Information Service, Silver Springs

  41. Martin A (1993) Hammerhead shark origins. Nature 364:494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Mayr E (1940) Speciation phenomena in birds. Amer Nat 74:249–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Moritz C (1994) Application of mtDNA in conservation: a critical review. Mol Ecol 3:401–411

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. NMFS (2001) Final United States plan of action for the conservation and management of sharks. NOAA/NMFS/US Department of Commerce, Feb 2001

  45. Palumbi SR (1996) Nucleic acids II: The polymerase chain reaction. In: Hillis DM, Moritz C, Mable BK (eds) Molecular systematics. Sinauer Assoc, Inc., Sunderland, pp 205–247

    Google Scholar 

  46. Pardini AT, Jones CS, Noble LR, Kreiser B, Malcolm H, Bruce BD, Stevens JD, Cliff G, Scholl MC, Francis M, Duffy CAJ, Martin AP (2001) Sex-biased dispersal of great white sharks. Nature 412:139–140

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Posada D, Crandall KA (1998) MODELTEST: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14:817–818

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Quattro JM, Chase MR, Rex MA, Greig TW, Etter RJ (2001a) Extreme mitochondrial DNA divergence within populations of the deep-sea gastropod Frigidoalvania brychia. Mar Biol 139:1107–1113

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Quattro JM, Jones WJ, Grady JM, Rohde FC (2001b) Gene-gene concordance and the phylogenetic relationships among rare and widespread pygmy sunfishes (genus Elassoma). Mol Phylogenet Evol 18:217–26

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Schizas NV, Street GT, Coull BC, Chandler GT, Quattro JM (1999) Molecular population structure of the marine benthic copepod Microarthridion littorale along the southeastern and Gulf coasts of the United States. Mar Biol 135:399–405

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Sites JW, Crandall KA (1997) Testing species boundaries in biodiversity studies. Conserv Biol 11:1289–1297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Slade RW, Moritz C, Heideman A (1994) Multiple nuclear-gene phylogenies: applications to pinnipeds and comparison with a mitochondrial DNA gene phylogeny. Mol Biol Evol 11:341–356

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Smith SE, Au DW, Show C (1998) Intrinsic rebound potentials of 26 species of Indo-Pacific sharks. Mar Freshw Res 49:663–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Springer S (1941) A new species of hammerhead shark of the genus Sphyrna. Proc Florida Acad Sci (1940) 5:45–62

    Google Scholar 

  55. Stevens JD, Bonfil R, Dunlvy NK, Walker PA. (2000) The effects of fishing on sharks, rays, and chimeras (chondrichthyans), and the implications for marine ecosystems. ICES J Mar Sci 57:476–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Stoner DS, Grady JM, Priede KA, Quattro JM (2003) Amplification primers for the mitochondrial control region and sixth intron of the nuclear-encoded lactate dehydrogenase A gene in elasmobranch fishes. Conserv Genet 4:805–808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Walker TI (1998) Can shark resources be harvested sustainably? A question revisited with a review of shark fisheries. Mar Freshw Res 49:553–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Weins JL, Penkrot TA (2002) Deliniting species using DNA and morphological variation and discordant species limits in spiny lizards (Sceloporus). Syst Biol 51:69–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Williams ST, Knowlton N, Wiegt LA, Jara JA (2001) Evidence for three major clades within the snapping shrimp genus Alpheus inferred from nuclear and mitochondrial gene sequence data. Mol Phyl Evol 20:375–89

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was made possible through the generous contribution of hammerhead shark samples by C. Woodley, National Ocean Service, Charleston, SC; M. Grace, L. Jones, National Marine Fisheries Service, Pascagoula, MS Laboratory; J. Carlson, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, Panama City, FL; G. Ulrich, D. Oakley, South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, Marine Resources Division, Charleston, SC; E. Heist, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL; F. Rohde, North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries; R. McAuley, Department of Fisheries, Government of Western Australia; M. Shivji, Nova University, and B. Stequert, Centre ORSTOM de Brest. T. Burgess, K. Oswald, and M. Roberts provided invaluable assistance with laboratory and analytical techniques. Funding for this project was provided by the Cooperative Institute for Fisheries Molecular Biology (FISHTEC; NOAA/NMFS (RT/F-1)), the National Science Foundation (OCE-9814172), and SC SeaGrant (R/MT-5) to JMQ. Additional funding was provided by the Louisiana Board of Regents Support Fund, LEQSF ((2000-2001)-ENH-TR-67) and the Graduate School, College of Sciences, and Department of Biological Sciences, University of New Orleans to JMG.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. M. Quattro.

Additional information

Communicated by J.P.Grassle, New Brunswick

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Quattro, J.M., Stoner, D.S., Driggers, W.B. et al. Genetic evidence of cryptic speciation within hammerhead sharks (Genus Sphyrna). Marine Biology 148, 1143–1155 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-005-0151-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Cryptic Species
  • Western North
  • Vertebral Count
  • Hammerhead Shark
  • Cryptic Lineage