Human–shark interactions have become more and more common over
the last 10 years due to an increase in human population, and a higher number
of ocean users. Fisherman, divers, swimmers and surfers all enter the realms of
the shark when pursuing these activities and unfortunately although incredibly
uncommon, shark-human conflicts do occur.
My research aims to investigate potential shark deterrents to
help increase protection for surfers in “sharky” waters. There have been a number of different shark deterrents
investigated in the past to try and protect ocean users. Electrical barriers, acoustic playbacks and
chemical deterrents have all shown potential.
However none of these methods have been completely successful or sustainable
and can have a negative effect on the environment and non-target species.
Shark nets were introduced in South Africa in 1952 in
Kwa-Zulu Natal to protect bathers. However, the nets are not a species specific defense and kill huge numbers of sharks and other marine species such as whales,
dolphins and sea turtles. Other deterrents such as the shark shield have been
developed for individual safety of swimmers and surfers but when tested with
large sharks such as the white shark it was less than successful (it was eaten).
Therefore it is important that more
sustainable methods of protection are investigated in order to help conserve
shark species and protect water users.
I am currently looking at whether or not the visual sign
stimulus of orca whales (Orcinus orca)
creates a natural fear and avoidance behaviour in white sharks (Carcharodon carcharias) and if this fear
can be utilized as a shark deterrent to increase surfer protection.
The idea behind this theory originates from observations of
orca whales feeding on elasmobranchs, including white sharks all over the world.A
fascinating event occurred in the South Farallon Islands (a well-known white
shark aggregation area) in 1999 where two orcas were seen eating a large white
shark. Furthermore,white sharks were not seen in the area for almost 2 months
after this event occurred. This reaction from the white sharks suggests that
they may have a natural fear of orca whales and take precautionary measures to avoid
them.
There are two possible explanations for this behavioural
reaction to another species. It could be
an innate behavioural response where sharks have a“hard wired”genetic instinct to
be afraid of orcas and react to their warning signals without any previous
experience. Alternatively it could be a
learnt behaviour where the sharks have seen orca whales before and have
experienced the specific visual, olfactory and acoustic cues of the orcas so
they can avoid them as early as possible in the future. Either way it makes
sense for white sharks to be able to recognize and respond to the threat of
orca whales.
Orcas have a very striking black and white pattern on the
ventral side of their body. This unambiguous
colouration and pattern could be a distinct warning signal to white sharks
triggering a cautious response and signalling its threat. This could be
valuable for juvenile orcas when they are still small and vulnerable to attack
from large sharks if they get separated from their family pod.
Interestingly there is a small dolphin species found off the
Southern African coast called the Heaviside dolphin (Cephalorhynchus heavisidii). These dolphins
share this distinctive ventral pattern and also live in white shark occupied waters,
but this dolphin poses no threat to sharks. However it could be possible that
this dolphin species has evolved a similar pattern to the orca whale to
increases its protection from becoming preyed on by large sharks such as great. If the sharks recognise this pattern and it
triggers a cautious or even a withdrawal response immediately, then the dolphin
will be less likely to be attacked. This defense tactic these dolphins seem to
have evolved is known as Batesian mimicry.
Source:
interesting facts.org.
Source: arkive.org
Batesian
mimicry is a broad and somewhat complex area of evolutionary biology. It was first brought to light by an English
naturalist called Henry Walter Bates, whose
work on butterflies in the Amazon
rainforest in the 1800’s pioneered the breakthrough of this natural phenomenon.
Batesian mimicry is most commonly seen in insects, fish and
snake species, but found in a number of terrestrial and marine species. It is based on predators learning from past
experience and used as a form of defense by less dangerous or harmless species
in order to increase their survival rate.
The two main strategies of mimicry are Batesian and Mullerian
mimicry. There are three groups involved
with this protective tactic. The species copying the signal is the “mimic”, the
species being mimicked is known as the “model” and the predator the mimic is
intending to deceive is the signal receiver.
Batesian mimicry works on the basis that the predator the
species is trying to avoid has encountered the unpalatable or more dangerous
model previously and learnt that the particular signal (i.e. colouration, smell
or sound) means the animal is an unprofitable one and therefore is deterred
from feeding on individuals that emit that particular signal, this could
explain the similar colouration in the Heaviside dolphin.For this reason
Batesian mimicry is most beneficial to mimics when the model species are in
greater abundance than the mimic species. If there are more mimics than models
the predators will not experience the negative reaction from the individual and
therefore not learn to avoid the warning signs. This is known as negative
frequency dependent selection.
One of the most famous and fascinating examples in Batesian
mimicry in the marine world is the mimic octopus (Thaumoctopus mimicus).
This highly
intelligent cephalopod is capable of mimicking other marine animals for
protection when moving across open areas of sand on the ocean floor. It has been
known to mimic sea snakes, lion fish, sole fish and even sting rays.
Source: Wikipedia
Mimicry is a very specific phenotypic evolutionary process,
which once the initial transition from cryptic colouration to an aposematic one
has been perfected the benefits for the mimic are obvious. However the process from changing from a
cryptic animal to an unambiguous one was confusing for biologists. If the process
was a gradual change, such as in the case of most evolutionary processes, with
each generation becoming slightly less cryptic and more unambiguous, then the
species would suffer a significant fitness loss.
One hypothesis made by evolutionary biologists Clarke and
Shepherd (1960) was that this step consists of one large mutation using “super
genes” where there is a sudden phenotypic change. This theory states that the
first generation of this modification are not perfect mimics, but carry a
remote likeness to the signal enough for survival and to gain selection for
future evolution, where the mimicry is refined and perfected.
To test
whether or not mimicking the visual signal of an orca whale will reduce attack
rates on potential prey items at the surface I am towing foam decoys around Seal
Island in Mossel Bay. These decoys will
simulate potential prey items at the surface and induce seal hunting behaviour
from the white sharks. There are 4
decoys towed in pairs, separated 15 m apart in order to give enough space
between them to make them independent tests due to the low visibility of the
water.
The two
pairs will consist of a plain black decoy paired with an orca decoy, which will
have the ventral black and white pattern of an orca whale, and a plain black
decoy paired with a black and white chequered decoy as a control against the
specific biological pattern. If white
sharks are afraid of the visual sign stimulus of orca whales it is expected
that the orca decoy will be attacked less frequently than the other decoys.
The
chequered decoy will test if the sharks are avoiding the orca decoy because it
views it as a threat i.e. an orca, in which case the chequered decoy will be
attacked significantly more than the orca decoy, or purely for the reason that
it doesn’t look like the shark’s intended target i.e. a Cape fur seal, due to
the contrasting colours and therefore both the chequer and the orca decoy will
have a similar attack rate.
Underwater
activity will also be recorded using GoPro cameras to show any withdrawal at
the decoys that cannot be seen from the surface. If the orca pattern is seen as a deterrent by
white sharks, it is expected that there will be a higher withdrawal rate on the
orca decoy than the other decoys.
All
four decoys towed at the same time to test the possible aposematic qualities of
the ventral pattern of an orca whale in the same environmental conditions.
Environmental
conditions also play a large part of white shark hunting behaviour. It is assumed that sharks hunting in clear
calm waters will be able to distinguish the difference between a real prey item
such as a seal, and a foam decoy.
Therefore fewer attempts on the decoys in high visibility are
anticipated. However, when there is a
disturbed sea surface due to wind chop and the water visibility is poor due to
increased debris and wave movement, sharks appear to mistake a decoy for a prey
item more regularly, as witnessed in previous research. This is presumably down to a greater margin
of error in identifying prey at the surface.
My study will investigate whether there is any correlation between the
frequency of attacks on the decoys and the abiotic factors they are towed in,
specifically to the Mossel Bay area.
The
overall outcome of this research project is to investigate whether it is
possible to reduce surfer’s risk of attack from white sharks by replicating the
ventral pattern of an orca whale on the bottom of surfboards to act as a
deterrent. Furthermore, by recording the
weather conditions and analysing correlations with attacks on the decoys, we
can create better guidelines for swimmers and surfers specifically in the
Mossel bay area (and also comparing it with other areas) making people more
aware of higher risk times to be in the water.
Mike Barron
- Msc. Candidate
No comments:
Post a Comment