Ethnotaxonomy of sharks from tropical waters of Brazil

Bibliographic Data

ID4721667
AuthorsMarcelo Moreira De Carvalho (0000-0003-2173-6968, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, corresponding author), Mônica Rocha De Oliveira (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte), Priscila F M Lopes (0000-0002-6774-5117, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte), Jorge Eduardo Lins Oliveira (0000-0002-2841-7102, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte)
Year2018
Volume14
Issue1
Pages71-71
Publication date2018-12-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1746-4269 • E-ISSN: 1746-4269
PublisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1186/s13002-018-0273-0
PMID30463569
OpenAlexW2901777345
LanguageEN
Citations received5
References cited40

BACKGROUND: Accessing folk knowledge from small-scale fishers is an affordable and reliable approach to understand the dynamic and diversity of shark species worldwide, especially of those eventually caught. In this context, ethnotaxonomy (folk identification and classification) may represent an alternative to support sharks fisheries management, especially in data-poor places. This study aimed to investigate fishing and ethnotaxonomy of the main shark species caught by small-scale fisheries from the coastal waters of the Brazilian Northeast. METHODS: Semi-structured and structured interviews were conducted with fishers targeting general aspects of fishing activities and specific topics regarding ethnotaxonomy, capture, and commercialization of sharks. For species identification, an ethnobiological systematic perspective was used to analyze the folk nomenclature and classification criteria. Non-parametric statistical tests were used to verify associations between species caught, fishing gear, and harvest period. RESULTS: Fishers mentioned 73 binomial names, 21 main folk species, and eight synonymies. Some species belonging to the same scientific genus are often named and grouped by the same folk name, with no distinction between species by fishers. Sharks are most landed as bycatch and correspond to less than 5% of the total commercial fisheries in the communities, with socioeconomic value for subsistence consumption and local commercialization. Sharks were said to be mainly caught with hand line and surface long line during the rainy season, while gillnet captures were associated to the dry season. At least three of the species most mentioned by fishers are currently classified as vulnerable and endangered worldwide. CONCLUSIONS: Even though landed sharks account for a small proportion of the fishing catches, their biological and life history features place sharks among the most vulnerable organisms globally. Such an ethnobiological approach towards shark identification may contribute to generate basic information on species caught, their frequency in the landings, and how different species belonging to the same genus can be landed and sold together. This type of information can generate subsidies to the development of conservation and management plans for these fishing resources, where knowledge is scarce

Agriculture · Biodiversity · Biology · Bycatch · Context (archaeology · Endangered species · Fishery · Fishing · Geography · Habitat · Subsistence agriculture · Fish Biology and Ecology Studies · Fish biology, ecology, and behavior · Ichthyology and Marine Biology · Identification and Quantification in Food · Ecology

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access