Morphometrics of white sharks Carcharodon carcharias

Morphometric Graphs for White Shark Carcharodon carcharias based on combination of data bases by LJVC and HFM (n = 214 comprising 98 males (filled squares), 112 females (open circles), 5 sex unknown, and 1 female with two sets of fin morphometrics)
Most morphometrics are graphed against total length because it was available for all specimens. It would be better to use fork length or precaudal length because total length is an ambigous measurement i.e. it can be measured with the caudal fin in the natural position (TL) or with the caudal fin in a depressed/stretched position (TOT) and it is often not stated what was used.
Body morphometrics (more)

Fork length FL ( or FOR)	Fork length FL (%TL)	Precaudal length PCL ( or PRC)	Precaudal length PCL (%TL)
Fin or head morphometrics have been used to estimate total length. Such estimates are notoriously imprecise, in particular for large white sharks. The following graphs demonstrate this using first dorsal height (D1H, e.g. from a visual estimate) and mouth width (MOW, e.g. from the cut-out of a surf board). Jaw and teeth morphometrics are included here.

First dorsal height D1H	First dorsal height D1H (%TL)	Mouth width MOW	Mouth width MOW (%TL)

First dorsal height D1H vs. PCL	First dorsal height D1H (% PCL) vs. PCL	Mouth width MOW vs. PCL	Mouth width MOW (% PCL) vs. PCL

Dried upper jaw perimeter	Dried upper jaw perimeter (%TL)	Tooth enameloid height (mm)	Tooth enameloid height (% TL)
Clasper morphometrics for males

Outer clasper length CLO	Outer clasper length CLO (%TL)	Inner clasper length CLI	Inner clasper length CLI (%TL)
Pectoral fin morphometrics

Pectoral anterior margin P1A	Pectoral anterior margin P1A (%TL)	Pectoral base P1B	Pectoral base P1B (%TL)
Caudal fin morphometrics

Caudal dorsal margin CDM	Caudal dorsal margin CDM (%TL)	Caudal preventral margin CPV	Caudal preventral margin CPV(%TL)
Mass morphometrics

Mass M	Condition factor M/TL3	Mass M (Super Data Set)	Condition factor M/TL3 (Super Data Set)

Morphometric Graphs for White Shark Carcharodon carcharias based on combination of data bases by LJVC and HFM (n = 214 comprising 98 males (filled squares), 112 females (open circles), 5 sex unknown, and 1 female with two sets of fin morphometrics)

Most morphometrics are graphed against total length because it was available for all specimens. It would be better to use fork length or precaudal length because total length is an ambigous measurement i.e. it can be measured with the caudal fin in the natural position (TL) or with the caudal fin in a depressed/stretched position (TOT) and it is often not stated what was used.

Body morphometrics (more)

Fork length FL
( or FOR) Fork length
FL (%TL) Precaudal length PCL
( or PRC) Precaudal length
PCL (%TL)

Fin or head morphometrics have been used to estimate total length. Such estimates are notoriously imprecise, in particular for large white sharks. The following graphs demonstrate this using first dorsal height (D1H, e.g. from a visual estimate) and mouth width (MOW, e.g. from the cut-out of a surf board). Jaw and teeth morphometrics are included here.

First dorsal height D1H First dorsal height D1H (%TL) Mouth width MOW Mouth width MOW (%TL)

First dorsal height D1H vs. PCL First dorsal height
D1H (% PCL) vs. PCL Mouth width
MOW vs. PCL Mouth width
MOW (% PCL) vs. PCL

Dried upper jaw perimeter Dried upper jaw perimeter (%TL) Tooth enameloid height (mm) Tooth enameloid height (% TL)

Clasper morphometrics for males

Outer clasper length CLO Outer clasper length
CLO (%TL)
Inner clasper length CLI

Inner clasper length
CLI (%TL)

Pectoral fin morphometrics

Pectoral anterior margin P1A Pectoral anterior margin P1A (%TL)
Pectoral base P1B

Pectoral base P1B (%TL)

Caudal fin morphometrics

Caudal dorsal margin

CDM

Caudal dorsal margin

CDM (%TL)

Caudal preventral margin CPV

Caudal preventral margin CPV(%TL)

Mass morphometrics

Mass M

Condition factor M/TL3

Mass M (Super Data Set)

Condition factor M/TL3 (Super Data Set)

Created September 2002; updated September 2002. Back to previous page

Please send comments or corrections to henry@elasmollet.org