Conservation Genetics

, Volume 4, Issue 4, pp 415–425 | Cite as

A streamlined, bi-organelle, multiplex PCR approach to species identification: Application to global conservation and trade monitoring of the great white shark, Carcharodon carcharias

  • Demian D. Chapman
  • Debra L. Abercrombie
  • Christophe J. Douady
  • Ellen K. Pikitch
  • Michael J. Stanhopen
  • Mahmood S. Shivji


The great white shark, Carcharodoncarcharias, is the most widely protectedelasmobranch in the world, and is classified asVulnerable by the IUCN and listed on AppendixIII of CITES. Monitoring of trade in whiteshark products and enforcement of harvest andtrade prohibitions is problematic, however, inlarge part due to difficulties in identifyingmarketed shark parts (e.g., dried fins, meatand processed carcasses) to species level. Toaddress these conservation and managementproblems, we have developed a rapid, moleculardiagnostic assay based on species-specific PCRprimer design for accurate identification ofwhite shark body parts, including dried fins. The assay is novel in several respects: Itemploys a multiplex PCR assay utilizing bothnuclear (ribosomal internal transcribed spacer2) and mitochondrial (cytochrome b) locisimultaneously to achieve a highly robustmeasure of diagnostic accuracy; it is verysensitive, detecting the presence of whiteshark DNA in a mixture of genomic DNAs from upto ten different commercially fished sharkspecies pooled together in a single PCR tube;and it successfully identifies white shark DNAfrom globally distributed animals. Inaddition to its utility for white shark trademonitoring and conservation applications, thishighly streamlined, bi-organelle, multiplex PCRassay may prove useful as a general model forthe design of genetic assays aimed at detectingbody parts from other protected and threatenedspecies.

great white sharks multiplex PCR shark conservation species identification 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baker CS, Palumbi, SR (1994) Which whales are hunted? A molecular genetic approach to monitoring whaling. Science, 265, 1538-1539.Google Scholar
  2. Baker CS, Cipriano F, Palumbi SR (1998) Molecular genetic identification of whale and dolphin products from commercial markets in Korea and Japan. Mol. Ecol., 5, 671-685.Google Scholar
  3. Castro JI (1993) A Field Guide to the Sharks Commonly Caught in Commercial Fisheries of the Southeastern United States. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-338.Google Scholar
  4. CITES (2000) Proposal to include Carcharodon carcharias (Great White Shark) on Appendix I of the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Proposal 11.48. Scholar
  5. CITES (2002) CITES-Listed Species Database. Scholar
  6. Compagno LJV (1999) Systematics and body form. In: Sharks, Skates and Rays: The Biology of Elasmobranch Fishes (ed. Hamlett WC), pp. 1-42. The Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore.Google Scholar
  7. Compagno LJV, MA Marks, IK Fergusson (1997) Threatened fishes of the world: Carcharodon carcharias (Linnaeus, 1758) (Lamnidae). Environ. Biol. Fishes, 50, 61-62.Google Scholar
  8. DeSalle R, VJ Birstein (1996) PCR identification of black caviar. Nature, 381, 197-198.Google Scholar
  9. Dizon A, CS Baker, F Cipriano, G Lento, P Palsboll, R Reeves (eds.) (2000) Molecular Genetic Identification of Whales, Dolphins, and Porpoises: Proceedings of a Workshop on the Forensic Use of Molecular Techniques to Identify Wildlife Products in the Marketplace. U.S. Dept. Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum, NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-286.Google Scholar
  10. Environment Australia (2001a) Draft recovery plan for the great white shark in Australia. Scholar
  11. Environment Australia (2001b) CITES Appendix III listing of the white shark-Identification manual for the white shark (Attachment C). htmlGoogle Scholar
  12. FAO (2000) Conservation and Management of Sharks. FAO Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries 4, Suppl. 1. Rome, 37 pp.Google Scholar
  13. Francis MP (1996) Observations on a pregnant white shark with a review of reproductive biology. In: Great White Sharks: The Biology of Carcharodon carcharias (eds. Klimley AP, Ainley D), pp. 157-172. Academic Press, San Diego.Google Scholar
  14. Heist EJ, JR Gold (1999) Genetic identification of sharks in the U.S. Atlantic large coastal shark fishery. Fish. Bull., 97, 53-61.Google Scholar
  15. Hoelzel AR (2001) Shark fishing in fin soup. Conserv. Genet., 2, 69-72.Google Scholar
  16. Innes BH, PM Grewe, RD Ward (1998) PCR-based genetic identification of marlin and other billfish. Mar. Freshwat. Res., 49, 383-388.Google Scholar
  17. Jukes TH, CR Cantor (1969) Evolution of protein molecules. In: Mammalian Protein Metabolism (ed. Munro, HN), pp. 21-123. Academic Press, NY.Google Scholar
  18. Last PR, Stevens JD (1994) Sharks and Rays of Australia. CSIRO, Australia.Google Scholar
  19. Malik S, PJ Wilson, RJ Smith, DM Lavigne, BN White (1997) Pinniped penises in trade: A molecular-genetic investigation. Conserv. Biol., 11(6), 1365-1374.Google Scholar
  20. Martin AP (1993) Application of mitochondrial DNA sequence analysis to the problem of species identification of sharks. In: Conservation Biology of Elasmobranchs (ed. Branstetter S), pp. 53-59. U.S. Dept. Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Report NMFS-115.Google Scholar
  21. Martin AP, GP Naylor, SR Palumbi (1992) Rates of mitochondrial evolution in sharks are slow compared with mammals. Nature, 357, 153-155.Google Scholar
  22. Martin AP, SR Palumbi (1993) Protein evolution in different cellular environments: Cytochrome b in sharks and mammals. Mol. Biol. Evol., 10(4), 873-891.Google Scholar
  23. Naylor GJP, AP Martin, EG Mattison, WM Brown (1997) Interrelationships of lamniform sharks: Testing phylogenetic hypotheses with sequence data. In: Molecular Systematics of Fishes (eds. Kocher TD and Stepien CA), pp. 195-214. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA.Google Scholar
  24. NMFS (2001) Final United States National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks. U.S. Dept. Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service Report.Google Scholar
  25. Palumbi SR, F Cipriano (1998) Species identification using genetic tools: The value of nuclear and mitochondrial gene sequences in whale conservation. J. Hered., 89, 459-464.Google Scholar
  26. Pank M, Stanhope M, Natanson L, Kohler N, Shivji M(2001) Rapid and simultaneous identification of body parts from the morphologically similar sharks Carcharhinus obscurus and Carcharhinus plumbeus (Carcharhinidae) using multiplex PCR. Mar. Biotechnol., 3, 231-240.Google Scholar
  27. Roman J, BW Bowen (2000) The mock turtle syndrome: Genetic identification of turtle meat purchased in the south-eastern United States of America. Anim. Conserv., 3, 61-65.Google Scholar
  28. Rose D (1996) An Overview of World Trade in Sharks and other Cartilaginous Fishes. TRAFFIC International, Cambridge, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
  29. Shivji M, Clarke S, Pank M, Natanson L, Kohler N, Stanhope M (2002) Genetic identification of pelagic shark body parts for conservation and trade monitoring. Conserv. Biol., 16(4), 1036-1047.Google Scholar
  30. Simpfendorfer C (1999) Management of shark fisheries in Western Australia. In: Case Studies of the Management of Elasmobranch Fishes (ed. Shotton R), pp. 425-455. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 378/2.Google Scholar
  31. Smith PJ, Benson PG (2001) Biochemical identification of shark fins and fillets from the coastal fisheries in New Zealand. Fish. Bull., 99, 351-355.Google Scholar
  32. Vannuccini S (1999) Shark Utilization, Marketing and Trade. FAO Technical Fisheries Paper 389. Rome, 470 pp.Google Scholar
  33. Wintner SP, Cliff G (1999) Age and growth determination of the white shark, Carcharodon carcharias, from the east coast of South Africa. Fish. Bull., 97(1), 153-169.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Demian D. Chapman
    • 1
  • Debra L. Abercrombie
    • 1
  • Christophe J. Douady
    • 2
  • Ellen K. Pikitch
    • 3
  • Michael J. Stanhopen
    • 4
  • Mahmood S. Shivji
    • 1
  1. 1.Guy Harvey Research Institute, Oceanographic CenterNova Southeastern UniversityDania BeachU.S.A
  2. 2.Biology and Biochemistry, The Queen's UniversityBelfastUK;
  3. 3.Wildlife Conservation SocietyBronxU.S.A
  4. 4.Biology and Biochemistry, The Queen'sUniversityBelfastUK;

Personalised recommendations