Bull Shark, Carcharhinus leucas, Playa del Carmen, Mexico, Caribbean Sea.
This guest column is brought to you by award-winning author Zachary Webb Nicholls, also known as “Dr. Jaws.” Read more from him at www.drjaws.net or pick up his latest book, The Bull Shark Compendium, here.
People who dearly love sharks (Sharkophiles, if you will) may find themselves frustrated by the lack of deep coverage on sharks in popular culture; sure, we know the basics (that sharks are ‘misunderstood’; that sharks are not doing well; that few species will actually attack you, yada yada yada) but apparently, not much else. This phenomenon – driven by a limited amount of airtime, plaque room, or words in a profile – lends to an illusion that sharks are, in themselves, simple, boring, and un-nuanced; that there really isn’t that much to say beyond the field guide, TV show, aquarium plate, or hell, even the IUCN Red List entry (which is, by the way, comparatively robust – this is not a dig).
But this “illusion of simplicity” (while prevalent in pop culture) is baseless: if given the space, a single species of shark can command centuries of research, mythology, and cultural tradition. Knowing this, I wanted to create that space – to compile all of the information that I could find on one species (from publically available papers to shark attack records, news reports and cultural essays) into a single source: a portrait that was sketched by empiricism, colored with legend, and shaded with the gravity of truth.
This portrait became The Bull Shark Compendium: a one-shark love-letter devoted to Carcharhinus leucas.
In our culture, Bull Sharks are commonly reduced to two pieces of trivia: “they are very dangerous,” and “they can enter freshwater.” But Carcharhinus leucas in itself commands 179 years of research (catching up to 5 million years of evolution); it’s an immeasurably complicated animal rich with nuance. In our pursuit to understand the marvel of this species, we have uncovered (and, in some cases, created) a bit of that nuance; and while much of it had become lost to time (and to the prison of biological jargon, which can sometimes be exclusory), a tremendous portion of it has found asylum in The Bull Shark Compendium’s 400+ pages.
Five Facts About Bull Sharks
Here are five such pieces of knowledge – stories that, while available for decades, rarely see the public eye due to their complexity (or lack of a platform):
- The Bull Shark’s Latin name of Carcharhinus leucas might be a misnomer. The English translation is “white sharpnose” (with “sharpnose” being the genus), and it derives from the original 1839 type specimen: a wholly white shark from the Antilles. The skin of this specimen may have been bleached by preservation, and so, the authors (Müller & Henle) may have mistaken this species as a naturally white Carcharhinus (hence the unique species name of leucas).
- In life, the Bull Shark’s skin has thousands of tiny blue spots. J.A.F. Garrick recorded this observation in a 1982 NOAA Technical Report (NMFS circular 445: 1-194). It’s fascinating to compare this to the recent observation of blue irises in the White Shark. Both species are uniquely opportunistic predators and are ascribed as dangerous (and sometimes monstrous); but both sharks carry a beautiful blue subtlety, found only by those who care to take a closer look.
- Bull Sharks exert dominance in captivity. A 1991 study of 27 captive sharks (in a 25,000 L tank at SeaWorld, Orlando) found that small Bull Sharks would often follow larger ones during tank patrols (Hussain, S.H., The Behavior of Sharks in Captivity). Furthermore, sharks of different species would often yield to Bull Sharks in instances of giveaway (that is, ‘shark chicken’); in instances of same-species giveaway, larger Bulls Sharks would likewise command the right of way.
- Bull Sharks are found in the Middle East (and have been accused as American weapons). In 2007, a Bull Shark was captured in the Iraqi portion of the Euphrates River; it was such as rare sight that the local fishermen doubted its authenticity, with one saying, “I believe that America is behind this matter.” To corroborate this (ludicrous) claim, a local teacher additionally posited that, “there was a 75 percent chance Americans had put the shark in the water.”
- The ‘Bull Shark’ could actually be three separate species. An extensive study published in the Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH 367, Naylor, G.J.P. et. al., 2012) described three genetic clusters within Carcharhinus leucas, suggesting that this ‘species’ may in fact be a ‘species complex’. The clusters reflected three regionally distinct populations: one in the Atlantic (which, if found to be a species, could fairly retain the name ‘Bull Shark’, since the original type specimen came from the Antilles), one in South Africa (which could be restored to ‘Zambezi Shark’, since Carcharhinus zambezensis was once thought to be a distinct species) and finally, one in the Pacific (which, I suggest, should be called the Beqa Shark, in homage to Fiji’s Beqa Lagoon – the quintessential Bull Shark dive experience). Only time will tell whether or not these three clusters will each deserve their own designations, or remain together as one Carcharhinus leucas.
These and so many other gems are preserved (and fully cited) within The Bull Shark Compendium, and reflect a species that, while popular, feels wholly exotic in its complexity.
This book meant to honor that exoticism – to honor a Bull Shark that we never knew. Carcharhinus leucas, and all sharks, for that matter, deserve better in the public eye – more space, more airtime, more nuance. As Sharkophiles know, there’s a dazzling amount of information hiding in plain sight; like blue spots on a Bull Shark, it can be found, as long as we devote the time and space, and care to take a closer look.
About the Author
For more information about Dr. Jaws, please visit the official website at www.drjaws.net.