PDA

View Full Version : Lone Blacktip shark was pregnant


davo
07-02-2007, 7:08 PM
Yup, another "virgin shark" story...

Aquarium officials from the Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Centre have revealed that a lone female Blacktip shark that died during a routine health check-up was pregnant.

The lack of a male Blacktip shark within the exhibit, in which the female was an inhabitant for 10 years, has attracted great scientific interest in the pregnancy.

DNA testing is now underway to find out how the pregnancy could have occurred – whether it was a result of asexual reproduction, or hybridisation with another species of shark within the enclosure.


Parthenogenesis
The female Blacktip shark, known as Tidbit, had reacted badly to anaesthetics during its annual health check-up. Post-mortem results revealed that the shark was close to giving birth to a 25cm/10” pup.

A form of asexual reproduction, also known as parthenogenesis, would appear to be the strongest possibility for the cause of the pregnancy. Up until very recently, however, parthenogenesis had not been documented in sharks.

In fact, a report confirming the first occurrence of parthenogenesis in sharks was published just the day before Tidbits death. The phenomenon was discovered through the DNA analysis of a Hammerhead shark that was born in 2001 at the Henry Doorly Zoo in Omaha.

Although it had not been previously documented, Bob Hueter, director of the Center for Shark Research at the Mote Marine Laboratory in Sarasota, believes that parthenogenesis could actually be quite a common occurrence among sharks in captivity.

"This is probably something that does happen in aquariums, more often than we realise," Heuter told the Washington Post. He believes that these recent cases are merely shedding light on the phenomenon.


Hybridisation
Another possible cause of the pregnancy could be hybridisation between the Blacktip shark and another species of shark within the exhibit. Hybridisation between species had not previously been recorded in sharks, and so should this be the case then it would be a world-first.

Bob George, the vet who carried out the post-mortem, told the Washington Post that although pathogenesis would be "a spiffy, interesting thing", he hopes that the tests do show hybridisation.

Tissue samples of Tidbit and the unborn pup have been sent to the same research team that analysed the DNA of the Hammerhead shark, a joint venture between scientists from Northern Ireland and the USA, in the hope of unravelling the mystery.

A preliminary report is expected to be delivered to the Virginia Aquarium soon. Should it show that the pup was a hybrid between two species, the scientists hope they will be able to identify the paternal species.

PFK

Zoodiver
07-02-2007, 8:26 PM
Good find, but this one was already proven wrong, too. It seems like everyone wants to have a virgin shark birth latley. That female had been in with males prior to being at that facility.

krj-1168
07-02-2007, 10:11 PM
Another possible cause of the pregnancy could be hybridisation between the Blacktip shark and another species of shark within the exhibit. Hybridisation between species had not previously been recorded in sharks, and so should this be the case then it would be a world-first.


That's funny be cause Hybridization makes lot more since than the "virgin birth" senario.

Hybrids are actually known to occur in nature as well as in captivity. And yes - I've actually heard of sharks producing hybrids. I've actually heard of a White-spotted Bamboo(Chilscyllium plagiosum) & a Brown-banded Bamboo(Chiloscyllium punctatum) producing off-spring together, in captivity.

Also their is some debate about the "Cortez" Horn shark in the Gulf of California/Sea of Cortez. Is it a natural hybrid between H.francisci & H. mexicanus or a seperate species all together or even is it actually a possibly an undiscovered sub-species of either species.

Hybridization may be rare - but it's still a real possibility.

Zoodiver
07-02-2007, 10:19 PM
Correct on both account of hybrids occuring.

ewurm
07-02-2007, 10:53 PM
If parthenogenesis does take place in public aquaria, are they obligated to name the baby JESUS? :ROFL:

krj-1168
07-03-2007, 6:04 PM
If parthenogenesis does take place in public aquaria, are they obligated to name the baby JESUS?


I highly doubt it.

davo
07-04-2007, 10:06 AM
Are hybrids known to occur with blacktips just out of interest?

Zoodiver
07-04-2007, 5:36 PM
Not that we've seen.

krj-1168
07-04-2007, 9:20 PM
But - just because it's never been seen before - doesn't mean it can't ever happen.

And it should be noted that there is a couple species that closely resemble the Blacktip.

aro-guy246
07-31-2007, 7:27 PM
Correct on both account of hybrids occuring.
I (gf of aro-guy246) actually work at the Virgina Aquarium and know all the sharks pretty well. And I have co-workers that have been with the aquarium for years. Tidbit was only 10 years old when she passed and we have had her for a good portion of her life. Since black-tip reef sharks don't become sexually mature until they are about 7 there isn't a chance that she could have become pregnant before coming to our facility. I am not saying that it is parthenogenesis for sure but we will see when the results come back what happened. If I hear anything I will be sure to keep everyone informed.

water_baby83
08-02-2007, 5:08 PM
I (gf of aro-guy246) actually work at the Virgina Aquarium and know all the sharks pretty well. And I have co-workers that have been with the aquarium for years. Tidbit was only 10 years old when she passed and we have had her for a good portion of her life. Since black-tip reef sharks don't become sexually mature until they are about 7 there isn't a chance that she could have become pregnant before coming to our facility. I am not saying that it is parthenogenesis for sure but we will see when the results come back what happened. If I hear anything I will be sure to keep everyone informed.

Yes please do keep us informed, as I am sure we would all love to know what you guys find. ;)

aro-guy246
10-10-2008, 4:13 PM
I know it has been a LONG time but the results are finally in and I thought you would all like to know. It has been confirmed and published in the journal of fish biology that they pup found in the womb of the black-tip (tid-bit) was the result of parthenogenesis! The DNA of the pup was a perfect match to mom, no DNA from a male shark at all. So all of you that were skeptical we have some pretty definitive proof. Anyways I said that I would tell you as soon as I knew so there it is!

Zoodiver
10-11-2008, 3:58 PM
Do we know what method of DNA testing was used?

See other thread for better info.

http://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=180545

aro-guy246
10-11-2008, 5:29 PM
I am not sure but I can find out. All I know of the testing right now is that it was done by the same lab that conducted the test for the case with the parthenogenesis in the hammerhead from Nebraska. I realize that there are a few months uncounted for but these were the first months of the sharks life (well before the age of maturity in blacktips). We aquired her at a very young age and have had her without any male at all from the time that we got her. I understand that we are scientists and we always question but there is almost no chance that she had sperm from a male which created the pup. Also I know the aquarist (curator) that the shark bit very well and she had known tid-bit from when we had gotten her. Anyways that is my opinion on the topic.

Zoodiver
10-11-2008, 7:41 PM
I know Mitch and the Omaha crew well.
I'm just worried people will jump on board an idea that doesn't hold water (no pun intended). I've seen alot of evidence for it, but nothing 100 percent concrete. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for punching holes in evolutionary theroy.... I just like to make sure there aren't gaps that go unaccounted for.

One thing that has come up in conversations is if we can accept and explore single parent births, should we also be more open minded to earlier (non mature) breeding and sperm storage as well?

aro-guy246
10-14-2008, 6:16 PM
Yes I do agree with you when you say that we don't want to jump into things too quickly and I understand that there always a possibilty for sperm storage and etc when we don't know the entire history of the animal. And we can rarely say in science that something is true without a doubt we can only go by what the evidence shows. So in tid-bit's case we can only go with the extremely strong evidence/ DNA evidence that shows parthenogenesis. I suppose there is a chance that a case like this could be a result of sprem storage but in tid-bit's case I have a little bit of a hard time believing that a >18 month old shark could/would mate with a 7+ year old mature male shark. I would just like to say as part of the viriginia crew that it has been quite the journey to get to this point (the bite (her recovery), the discovery of the pup, and then the waiting and waiting for the DNA results). I do appreciate your ideas, opinions and expertise on the topic it has made me think that's for sure and I hope I may have provided some insight into my side of things as well.

Zoodiver
10-14-2008, 11:48 PM
thanks for the update.

Bottomfeeder
10-15-2008, 5:43 AM
well the first one was a hammerhead so the baby being a hammerhead kinda rules out hybridization. what other secies was the blacktip with?

Bottomfeeder
10-15-2008, 5:45 AM
I know it has been a LONG time but the results are finally in and I thought you would all like to know. It has been confirmed and published in the journal of fish biology that they pup found in the womb of the black-tip (tid-bit) was the result of parthenogenesis! The DNA of the pup was a perfect match to mom, no DNA from a male shark at all. So all of you that were skeptical we have some pretty definitive proof. Anyways I said that I would tell you as soon as I knew so there it is!
:woot::woot::woot::shark:

aro-guy246
10-16-2008, 5:59 PM
The other sharks that were in the tank include: 5 sand-tigers (3females and 2males) and 3 sandbar sharks (2females and 1male).

serafino
10-16-2008, 11:13 PM
Do you know what part of the gene they sequenced to match? Was it the CO1?

aro-guy246
10-17-2008, 5:01 PM
I'm not 100% sure, I acutally haven't had a chance to read the paper they have published in the Journal of Fish Biology but once I get a chance to take a look at it or talk to the people at work I'll let you know what I have found out!

basslover34
10-22-2008, 11:40 PM
WOW ... interesting thread... makes you think thats for sure...