Elsevier

Biological Conservation

Volume 228, December 2018, Pages 142-147
Biological Conservation

Short communication
Simple biopsy modification to collect muscle samples from free-swimming sharks

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2018.10.024Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Obtaining sufficient muscle tissue from large sharks can be challenging.

  • Using a water balloon to trap water in a biopsy probe enables use from the surface.

  • With the balloon the probe retains similar biopsies from the surface and underwater.

  • The tissue retained is ample for isotope, lipid, ecotoxicology and genetic research.

  • Taking biopsies from the surface provides additional sampling opportunities.

Abstract

Developing and enhancing non-lethal methods for sampling species of high conservation concern, including marine megafauna, has prompted the development of numerous biopsy methods to collect tissue for biochemical analyses. However, many of these analyses require adequately-sized muscle cores for reliable results. Here, we developed and trialed a novel modification to a biopsy probe traditionally limited to underwater use, which enables sampling of free-swimming sharks from above the surface. The modified probe used collected similar amounts of white shark, Carcharodon carcharias, muscle and sub-dermal tissue above water as the traditional underwater probe (muscle: 0.36 g vs. 0.44 g; sub-dermal tissue: 0.62 g vs. 0.44 g for surface and underwater respectively). Both methods obtained sufficient tissue for several analyses to be run on the same tissue core (e.g. stable isotopes, fatty acids, and genetics). This encourages the use of this biopsy probe, with studies assessing stock structure, trophic ecology, or physiology. The described modification adapts the probe to allow above-water deployment, providing more opportunities for effective, non-lethal sampling of free-swimming sharks.

Introduction

Research programs investigating the biology and ecology of marine animals are increasingly calling for the development and use of non-lethal sampling techniques (Fossi et al., 2010; Jardine et al., 2011; Smith et al., 2018). This is especially pronounced for studies of elasmobranchs (Heupel and Simpfendorfer, 2010; Hammerschlag and Sulikowski, 2011; Marshall and Pierce, 2012), owing to their generally low abundance and high conservation concern (Dulvy et al., 2014).

Gaining a robust understanding of diet, habitat use, population size, and stock structure is vital as it underpins appropriate conservation and management strategies (outlined in Carrier et al., 2018). Additionally, quantifying the load of natural (Meyer et al., 2016) and anthropogenic (Marsili et al., 2016; Fossi et al., 2017) toxins on elasmobranchs is increasingly important as human activity and urbanisation encroaches on a growing array of marine habitats. Paralleling the call for non-lethal sampling, smaller tissue quantities (<1 g) can now be used in studies investigating trophic ecology (Boecklen et al., 2011; Meyer et al., 2017; Pethybridge et al., 2018; Munroe et al., 2018), population structure (Smith et al., 2018), and ecotoxicology (Marsili et al., 2016; Fossi et al., 2017). There has been a push to develop minimally invasive, in situ sampling devices targeting free-swimming animals (Reeb and Best, 2006; Robbins, 2006; Noren and Mocklin, 2012; Smith et al., 2018) as these offer alternatives to collecting tissue via lethal sampling or restraining animals, which can be logistically difficult and stressful for large species.

Advances in biopsy probe design (e.g. Reeb and Best, 2006) and firing devices (including pole spears, rifles, crossbows, and spearguns) have largely been applied to sampling marine mammals from the surface (reviewed in Noren and Mocklin, 2012). Some of these designs have been adapted for underwater sampling, e.g. for elasmobranchs >1 m total length (e.g. Robbins, 2006; Daly and Smale, 2013). This includes the biopsy probe outlined in Daly and Smale (2013), which relies on suction to extract tissue cores. Underwater, suction is created as water is not compressible, and is thus expelled out of ventilation holes as the probe penetrates the skin. A rubber band covering the holes acts as a one-way valve (Fig. 1A), preventing backflow into the probe, therefore creating the necessary suction to retain the tissue core as the probe is withdrawn. However, this suction mechanism does not work above the surface. Air is compressible, and the rubber band which acts as a valve underwater, creates a tight seal, preventing the air in the probe from being expelled through the ventilation holes. Upon withdrawal, the air re-expands, not creating the required suction to retain a tissue core. Obtaining adequately sized tissue cores from above the surface offers a number of practical advantages (research is not constrained by in-water limitations including communication, nitrogen accumulation, and temperature), increasing sampling opportunities. Here, we assess the effectiveness of a water-balloon adaptation to enable the use of the Reeb and Best (2006) biopsy probe (assessed in Daly and Smale, 2013) to target white shark Carcharodon carcharias from above the water's surface.

Previously, large elasmobranchs such as whale sharks Rhincodon typus and white sharks have been biopsied from the surface with various probes using a hatch door system, mechanically slicing off the tissue core (described in Jaime-Rivera et al., 2013). The tissue collected has often been limited to skin and sub-dermal tissue (the thick layer of elastin and collagen underlying the skin) (e.g. Castro et al., 2007; Carlisle et al., 2012; Rohner et al., 2013; Fossi et al., 2017), however, the underlying muscle is the preferred tissue for a number of trophic analyses, e.g. stable isotopes (Hussey et al., 2015) and fatty acid analysis (Every et al., 2016). As such, the quantity of muscle retained by these biopsy devices can limit the type and number of analyses that can be conducted (Meyer et al., 2017). Responsible sampling, including maximizing the output from collection opportunities, is a financial, scientific, and ethical imperative (Heupel and Simpfendorfer, 2010). Thus, we compare the amount of sub-dermal and muscle tissue obtained from the surface-adapted and underwater biopsy probes to determine the efficacy of the water-balloon adaptation in successfully collecting sufficient tissue for multiple biochemical analyses.

Section snippets

Biopsy equipment

The standard biopsy probe, manufactured by Rob Allen Dive Factory (www.roballen.co.za) in Durban, South Africa, attaches to the end of a spear and is typically fired underwater. In our study, the probe was attached to a 1.3 m steel spear, shot from a 1.1 m long Beuchat speargun powered by a 20 mm diameter elastic rubber. The probe consisted of a hollow 1 cm diameter stainless steel tube with a sharpened front edge to puncture the skin (Daly and Smale, 2013; Fig. 1). The biopsy probe tip screwed

Results

The two biopsy methods retained similar quantities of muscle (surface: 0.36 ± 0.21 vs. underwater: 0.44 ± 0.37 g, P = 0.170, Fig. 4), which was not influenced by shark total length (P = 0.131). Eighty-eight percent of total biopsies (38 of the 43 from both underwater and above the surface) contained sufficient muscle for stable isotope, genetic, fatty acid, and ecotoxicology analyses. Although not explicitly tested within this study, failure rate and haemorrhaging rate were both estimated to be

Discussion

The underwater and surface-adapted biopsy probes had the same estimated success rates (90%) and was similar to other underwater probes including the one tested by Daly and Smale (87% in Daly and Smale, 2013) and both probes tested by Robbins (2006) (87% and 91%). The surface-adapted biopsy performed similarly to those tested in Jaime-Rivera et al. (2013), which had reported success rates of 80%, 95%, and 100% for the biopsy device using a trap door mechanism to retain tissue cores. As the

Conclusion

The novel adaptation of an existing underwater biopsy probe enables its use from the surface with no significant difference in muscle or sub-dermal tissue retention. Both biopsy methods obtained ample tissue for a number of biochemical analyses to investigate trophic ecology, population structure, and ecotoxicology of chondrichthyans. With the described modification, this biopsy probe can now be used both underwater and above the surface, providing more opportunities for effective, non-lethal

Declaration of interest

The authors have no competing interests to declare.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Rob Allen and the team from Rob Allen Dive Factory (www.roballen.co.za) in Durban, South Africa, for manufacturing the biopsy probes and providing the diagrams in Fig. 1. We appreciate the ongoing support of the white shark cage-diving operators, including the teams at Rodney Fox Shark Expeditions, Adventure Bay Charters, and Calypso Star Charters. We also thank the Save Our Seas Foundation (Switzerland, grant ID #RPF14/553), Holsworth Wildlife Research Endowment (Australia),

References (30)

  • R. Daly et al.

    Evaluation of an underwater biopsy probe for collecting tissue samples from bull sharks Carcharhinus leucas

    Afr. J. Mar. Sci.

    (2013)
  • N.K. Dulvy et al.

    Extinction risk and conservation of the world's sharks and rays

    elife

    (2014)
  • N. Hammerschlag et al.

    Killing for conservation: the need for alternatives to lethal sampling of apex predatory sharks

    Endanger. Species Res.

    (2011)
  • M.R. Heupel et al.

    Science or slaughter: need for lethal sampling of sharks

    Conserv. Biol.

    (2010)
  • J.L. Hintze et al.

    Violin plots: a box plot-density trace synergism

    Am. Stat.

    (1998)
  • Cited by (11)

    • Foraging plasticity diversifies mercury exposure sources and bioaccumulation patterns in the world's largest predatory fish

      2022, Journal of Hazardous Materials
      Citation Excerpt :

      Sharks were attracted to the cage-diving vessels using a combination of attractants. Biopsies were taken from diving cages or from the surface using a single 20-mm rubber speargun, with the end of the 1.3 m spear modified into a hollow 1 cm diameter stainless steel biopsy probe (Meyer et al., 2018), targeting the dorsal or upper flank musculature directly below the dorsal fin. Biopsies were immediately frozen (−4 °C) and transported to the laboratory where white muscle tissue was dissected from the sub-dermal tissue and skin.

    • The effects of wildlife tourism provisioning on non-target species

      2020, Biological Conservation
      Citation Excerpt :

      Whole fish were measured and dissected on-board the vessels, with muscle samples and stomachs collected for biochemical and stomach content analysis respectively. Free-swimming rays were biopsied at the Neptune Islands using a speargun (Meyer et al., 2018), while control samples were collected at a fish market from rays caught within the Gulf of St Vincent, SA (∼200 km from the Neptune Islands). Yellowtail kingfish muscle samples were donated from a recreational fishing charter operating around Buffalo Reef (Table 1).

    • The impact of wildlife tourism on the foraging ecology and nutritional condition of an apex predator

      2019, Tourism Management
      Citation Excerpt :

      Sharks were attracted to the cage-diving vessels using a combination of attractants (bait and chum [mixture of minced bluefin tuna head, tails, gills and guts]) (DEWNR, 2016; Huveneers & Lloyd, 2017). Biopsies were taken from diving cages or from above the water's surface using a single 20 mm rubber speargun, with the end of the 1.3 m spear modified into a hollow 1 cm diameter stainless steel biopsy probe (Meyer, Fox, & Huveneers, 2018), targeting the dorsal or upper flank musculature directly below the dorsal fin. Biopsies were immediately frozen (−4 °C) and transported to the laboratory where white muscle tissue was dissected from the sub-dermal tissue and skin.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text