GALAPAGOS WHALESHARK PROJECTFIELDWORK REPORT 2018
JONATHAN R. GREEN& ALEX HEARN PhD
WWW.GALAPAGOSWHALESHARK.ORG

Sofia M. Green5, Jenny Waack5, Jonathan R. Green5, Harry Reyes1, Simon J. Pierce2,
Rui Matsumoto7, Chris Rohner2, Kiyomi Murakumo7 & Alex Hearn4

PARTICIPATING ORGANISATIONS:FDIRECCION DEL PARQUE NACIONAL GALÁPAGOS,
2MARINE MEGAFAUNA FOUNDATION,
3GALAPAGOS CONSERVATION TRUST,
4UNIVERSIDAD SAN FRANCISCO DE QUITO,
5GALAPAGOS WHALE SHARK PROJECT,
6PLANETERRA
7OKINAWA CHURASHIMA FOUNDATION

Figure 1: Darwin Arch by Darwin Island, dive and study site. Photo: ©Jonathan R. Green 2016

GALAPAGOSMARINERESERVE

With the crea*on of the Galapagos Marine Reserve, (GMR)
extending 40 nau*cal miles from the outermost point of theperipheral islands, a large area of the north east Paciﬁcprovides protec*on to a diverse and thriving marine
community. This includes many of the Galapagos endemic
species as well as resident, na*ve and migratory fauna andthe world’s largest ﬁsh, the whale shark, Rhincodon typus.
An ocean traveller, the whale shark is found between thela*tudes of 40° north and 45° south in all the oceans and ismostly associated with tropical, sub-tropical and temperatewaters. Whale sharks feed predominantly by ﬁlter feeding
on a wide variety of planktonic (microscopic) organisms but
have been observed lunge feeding on nektonic (larger freeswimming) prey, such as schooling ﬁshes, small crustaceans,and occasionally tuna and squid. Whale sharks are
ovoviviparous with eggs hatching within the female’s uteri
2and the female giving birth to live young. Whale sharks in the
GMR are seasonal with highest recorded numbers during themonths of July – October. (Hearn et al. 2014) Very liTle is known
about their biology and ecology, and their movements,
par*cularly in the Eastern Tropical Paciﬁc.
The Galapagos Whale Shark Project began in 2011 with a series ofﬁeld trips to study the movements of whale sharks within the
GMR and with satellite tagging to track their movements on a
local and regional scale. Early data showed that over 99% of allsigh*ngs in the Galapagos were of adult females. (Acuña etal.2014). The study site is Darwin Arch near Darwin Island at thefurthest north of the Galapagos Archipelago. (See Figures 1 & 2)
Figure 2: Map of Galapagos Marine Reserve with baseline and 40 nm limit and Bathymetric map ofDarwin Island. (Cesar Peñaherrera P. CDF)

3

Figure 3: Whale Shark swimming over Darwin platform, with diver. Photo: ©Jonathan R. Green 2018

WHALE SHARKS

Observers also noted that none of the sharks appeared to
be feeding and are mostly seen with the mouth closed or
only slightly parted. Since observa*on began in 1991, only
one whale shark has been conﬁrmed as feeding at the divesite, El Derumbe at Wolf Island, (Green pers. ob. 2012),
although reports have been made from naturalists offeeding whale sharks nearby San*ago Island, but not
substan*ated. Furthermore over 95% of the adult females
display highly distended abdomens which may be sugges*veof a state of gesta*on. (See Figure 4).
One of the most frequent ques*ons concerning whale
sharks is the loca*on or loca*ons and habitat in which thepups are born. Historically only a few neonatal, <1m, whale
sharks have been reported, either through by-catch or foundin shallow coastal waters by ﬁsherman and divers.
Considering their distribu*on and proliﬁc nature of whale
shark births, (Joung et al. 1996, Schmidt et al. 2010) this is a4

surprisingly small number of encounters with neonates. Similarly
by-catch from ﬁsheries such as purse seine tuna ﬁshing in pelagicareas, also reports an extremely low number of captures,
although reports exist for all three oceanic regions, Paciﬁc, Atlan*cand Indian.
Neonatal whale sharks are thought to have limited swimming
abili*es compared to juveniles and adults (Mar*n 2007). Could it
be then that whale sharks are birthing below the depths at whichmost of the predators that would target neonates and very youngwhale sharks are present, on or close by marine pladorms such as
the Galapagos pladorm or around seamounts that may provide amore protected habitat than the open ocean?
Figure 4: Mature (>10m) female whale shark with highly distended abdomen.
Photo: ©Sofia M. Green 2018

5

Figure 5: Fin mounted SPOT6 / 257 satellite tag. Photo: ©Jonathan R. Green 2018

SATELLITE TAGS

Tracks from satellite tags deployed in the last seven years
have shown that whale sharks frequently pass by Darwin
Island but few stay longer than 48-72 hours, (Acuña et al.
2014). Many of the tracks also show that ager heading west
the same sharks return past Darwin Arch before heading
south in November-December, towards the Peru shelf breakwhere they appear to spend *me foraging in the rich
upwelling areas of high produc*vity associated with thePeru Coastal or Humboldt current. The ques*on that arises
here is for what reason the female whale sharks are coming
to Darwin?
This season we deployed a prototype design of ﬁn mounted
tags, (see Figures 5, 6 & 7), moving away from the towed
tags used in previous seasons, to try to aTain a higher
percentage of tag reten*on and longer periods of datatransmission. We also focused more on the reproduc*ve
6state of the female sharks in order to try to ascertain pregnancy byusing ultrasound equipment and taking blood samples for later
analysis.
Satellite tags: In order to get long-term data from the tags we
decided to use a ﬁn mount with no ﬂoata*on capability as thelikelihood of recovering these tags is close to zero. Our longest
deployment was last season with a SPOT6 tag that lasted
approximately 360 days which was the es*mated baTery life given
the parameters we had pre-programmed for daily transmissions.
Figure 6 (left):
SPOT6 – 257 with
1500-day battery
capacity.
Photo: ©Jonathan R.
Green 2018
Figure 7 (right): SPOT6– 258 with 300-day
battery capacity.
Photo: ©Jonathan R.
Green 2018

As we know that the sharks are not returning usually during thisperiod we need data that indicates movements over a much
longer period of *me. The SPOT6 type 257 has an es*matedbaTery life of 1500 days or 4.1 years. This poten*ally gives us abeTer opportunity of tracking regional movements and maybe
even recording their return to the GMR. A major factor that must
be taken into account, is of course fouling, as marine invertebrates
and algae begin to colonise the tag surfaces and compromise
func*onality. The tag is coated with an* fouling paint to delay thisprocess but protec*on decreases rapidly ager about 18 months.
7

Figure 8: Dr Alex Hearn
deploys a SPOT6 / 258 tagon the dorsal fin of a whale
shark.
Photo: ©Jonathan R. Green2018

Figure 9: 1 shows Wet /Dry Sensor at the base of
the antenna of the SPOT6 /258 tag.
Photo: ©Jonathan R. Green2018

In comparison to last season the ﬁn mount tags sit high on thedorsal ﬁn and the antenna is in a ver*cal posi*on in order tomaximise transmission opportuni*es.
We also tried a smaller, (53g as opposed to 160g of the 257),
SPOT6 – 258 tag that has a baTery capacity of 300 days at 250
transmissions p/day. Both tags,
developed by Wildlife Computers
have the Wet / Dry sensors close
to the base of the antenna sothat as soon as the ﬁn of theindividual breaches the surface
the tag will begin to transmit
posi*onal data and temperature
histograms. With the improved
posi*on on the ﬁn and direc*onof antenna we are op*mis*c ofgemng superior data.
8

Figure 10: miniPAT tag
with 15cm attachment
cable.
Photo: ©Jonathan R.
Green 2016

We also deployed seven miniPAT tags, (see Figure 10), three ofthem double taggings with SPOT tags, (see Appendix) but weupdated some of the semngs to aTempt to improve data andreten*on *mes with these tags also. Release depth was changed
from 1400m to 1700m as all releases from last season werepremature due to deep dives. Time release was also increased
from 4 months to 6. The aTachment is s*ll by pneuma*c spear
gun but with a very short tether to reduce removal by associatedspecies, principally other shark species and Giant Trevallies, all ofwhich were seen closely associated with whale sharks at the *meof tagging or shortly agerwards.

9

Figure 11: Rui Matsumoto carrying out ultrasound examination on a female whale
shark in the wild. Photo: ©Jonathan R. Green 2018

ULTRASOUND

Although this was aTempted last year no images of internalorgans or structures were obtained. In order to conﬁrm
reproduc*ve state we needed to get images that physicallyshow indica*ons of organs, egg cases or embryos. The same
unit, a Hitachi Aloka portable system was used as theprevious year but with enhanced penetra*on that allowed
the capture of images to a depth of 40cm. This semng
however produced a more dissipated beam so this was reset
to 30cm for a clearer image. Our knowledge of thephysiology of adult whale sharks is based mostly on
individuals caught in nets then autopsied but the medical
and research staﬀ at the Okinawa Churashiama Founda*onogen uses ultrasonography to check the pregnancy status
and baseline health of a diversity of elasmobranchs,
including whale sharks.
Ini*ally the transducer was moved in a longitudinal fashion,(see Figure 12) in order to capture images of the en*re10

ventral area anterior of the pelvic ﬁns but the skin thickness of theupper abdomen was so thick that the ultrasound could not
penetrate the abdominal cavity and no detail could be seen. The
skin in this area was 27cm thick as measured by ultrasound.

Figure 12:
Longitudinal scan used
at first by Dr Rui
Matsumoto.

For this reason ager three aTempts Rui Matsumoto began to scana transect from the upper abdominal area toward the ventral
midline just anterior of the pelvic ﬁns. (See Figure 13)

Figure 13: Transverse
scan later used by Dr
Rui Matsumoto.

With increasing success the images revealed organs and theircontents, for the ﬁrst *me with mature female whale sharks infree environment and wild state, (not in aquarium or caught innets).
The ﬁrst breakthrough was when the Okinawa team were able todetect the presence of developed ovaries and within them welldeveloped follicles. (See Figures 14, 15 & 16 Ultrasound images).
In this area, adjacent to the pelvic ﬁns the skin thickness was justover 10cm and allowed suﬃcient penetra*on of the ultrasound.
11However the area we were able to examine is very limited so
although the images show for the ﬁrst *me the ovaries andfollicles we s*ll need to be able to examine the anterior ventral
areas to determine pregnancy as pregnant sharks have a large
distribu*on of eggs in the ovaries and the uterus and embryos, (ifpresent) would most likely be found in the anterior area.

Figure 14: Ultrasound image ofwhale shark showing ovaries withfollicles.
©Okinawa Churashima Foundation
12

Figure 15: Ultrasound image ofwhale shark showing ovaries withfollicles delineated and size
estimates.
©Okinawa Churashimi
Foundation

13

Figure 16: Ultrasound image of
second whale shark showing
follicles with size estimates.
©Okinawa Churashimi
Foundation

14

Figure 17: Blood draw from the pelvic fin Photo: ©Jonathan R. Green 2018.

BLOOD DRAW

Two blood samples were drawn last season, in July 2017, butthese were not analysed. We were able to obtain a further 6
blood samples, all from mature female whale sharks. One
sample from last season was from an adult male. Our permit
allowed us to transport 5 of the 6 from this season’s samples
to the San Francisco de Quito University where they were
subsequently analysed along with the two from last year. A
member of the Okinawa Churashima Founda*on, Dr Ryo
Nozu, an expert in elasmobranch reproduc*ve physiology
and endocrinologist, travelled from Japan only to undertakethe analysis.
Blood was drawn by Kiyomi Murakomo, from the pelvic ﬁn,(see Figure 17) as this has proven easier than taking bloodfrom the dorsal and pectoral ﬁns. For the sake of uniformity
in sampling this was the only area sampled. The equipment
was a double syringe with stopcock and a 189mm needle.
15

Blood is drawn ﬁrst into the secondary syringe, contaminated withseawater, the valve closed and uncontaminated blood is thendrawn in to the primary syringe. The thickness of the skin proved achallenge and the blood draw procedure ogen had to be carriedout in under 30 seconds before the animal passed below our
maximum safe opera*ng depth of 40m (see Figures 18 & 19).

Figure 18: Blood draw
equipment with bloodfrom two adult female
sharks and inset image
for scale
Photo: ©Jonathan R.
Green 2018

Immediately ager collec*on the blood was taken back to the
Queen Mabel for pre-analysis processing. The primary syringe wastreated with lithium heparin an*coagulant to allow *me forcentrifuging without clomng. This allowed the separa*on of thesample into whole blood and plasma and the plasma is
subsequently analysed for the presence and amounts of three
hormones, testosterone, progesterone and oestrogen. On board
the plasma and whole blood were stored in separate vials in thefreezer prior to their transport to the USFQ. The sample was also16

Figure 19: Blooddraw from thepelvic fin
Photo:©Jonathan R.
Green 2018

tested on board for par*al pressure of oxygen and carbon dioxide,lac*c acid and pH to understand the physical condi*on of sharks.
(See Figure 20). At the university the plasma was processed
through electrophoresis and the results taken for further analysis
by Dr Ryo Nozu, to the Okinawa Churashima Research Centre in
Japan.

Figure 20: Left on board analysis of whole blood for partial pressure of O2, CO2, pH and Lactic Acid.
Centre: sample is placed in centrifuge. Bottom right: Plasma and whole blood for lab analysis.
(Preserved frozen in separate vials)
Photos: ©Jonathan R. Green 201817

Figure 21: Diver approaches to take a biopsy. Photo: ©Jonathan R. Green 2018.

BIOPSY / TISSUESAMPLING

Figure 22 (right): The skintissue sample approx. 2cm
collected using a marine
biopsy tip.
Photo: ©Jonathan R. Green2018

Five skin *ssue samples were collected using a Cressi SL55
pneuma*c spear gun with a PneuDart Marine Biopsy Tip,
(see Figure22). These
were divided
back on theMabel into 3
vials, 2preserved in
98% ethanol
for DNA
analysis and1 frozen for
Stable Isotope and FaTy Acids analysis.
These are currently at the Galapagos Science Centre in San
Cristobal awai*ng the permits for transport.

18

Figure 23: The area shown in red is used for mapping the unique spot patterns for identification.
Photo ©Jonathan R. Green 2018

PHOTO
IDENTIFICATION

A total of 35 individual whale sharks were photographed andthe data submiTed to the Wildbook for Whale Sharks,
hTps://www.whaleshark.org/ global database, foriden*ﬁca*on. (See Appendix 1).
As with all previous ﬁeldwork we try to obtain both leg andright ﬂank images from the ﬁgh gill slit to the anterior baseof the dorsal ﬁn, with priority on the leg side. (See Figure23). The purpose of photo iden*ﬁca*on is to study site
ﬁdelity, how long they stay in the area of Darwin Arch and19the frequency with which they return to this area. Also any
previous or future sigh*ngs on a global level help provide data
about the sharks’ movements over a period of *me. This data may
be used to infer behaviour and iden*fy areas of speciﬁc need suchas feeding, breeding and birthing.

Figure 24: A massive mature female whale shark swims by Darwin Arch
Photo ©Sofia M. Green 201820

Figure 25: Two whale sharks glide by each other Photo: ©Jonathan R. Green 2018

RESULTSThis year we managed to carry out a number of ac*vi*es
with concrete results that are a ﬁrst in whale shark scienceand inves*ga*on, in the world. The ultrasound images of theovaries containing follicles and the blood chemical hormonal
analysis give insight into the reproduc*ve status of whale
sharks. Although we have not been able to determine yet
the presence, or absence of embryos, we now know that thelarge female whale sharks visi*ng the Galapagos waters areindeed sexually mature and are soon to copulate or may
have recently copulated, according to Dr Rui Matsumoto.
The blood samples and diagnos*c analysis is s*ll pending as
Dr Ryo Nozu will follow up ager his most recent trip. In situ
we were able to see that the par*al pressure of both O2 andCO2 indicated the whale sharks from which blood was
drawn are healthy whilst lac*c acid indicated very low levelsof stress when compared to aquarium data, (low stress) anddata from individuals that have been caught in nets during
21

ﬁshing opera*ons, (high stress) by commercial ﬁshermen in Japan.
Given that one of these samples was from a female that had beenpreviously double satellite tagged and had an ultrasoundexamina*on carried out on her this helps conﬁrm that thescien*ﬁc interven*on causes liTle or no reac*on and is not a
direct cause of stress.
This year we increased the release depth for the miniPAT tags to
1700m from 1400m and the pop oﬀ *me to six months from fourthat they were set for last season. We hope that that might extend*me and depth dive proﬁle data for the seven miniPATs deployed
this season. Below are the dive proﬁles obtained from last season:

Figure 26: miniPAT#172239 dive profile©Marine MegafaunaFoundation

22

Figure 27:
miniPAT#172240dive profile©MarineMegafaunaFoundation

Figure 28:
miniPAT#172241
dive profile©MarineMegafaunaFoundation

23

Figure 29:
miniPAT#172245
dive profile©MarineMegafaunaFoundation

Figure 30:
miniPAT#172246
dive profile©MarineMegafaunaFoundation24

Graph of All Tags

Figure 31:
miniPAT diveprofiles alltags©MarineMegafaunaFoundation

All of the miniPATs deployed last season released prior to theirprogrammed release date with the longest deployment being justover 10 weeks for #172241 but the shortest less than one week,#172239 as a result of deep dives triggering release. (Theexcep*on being #172239, which released at a depth ofapproximately 340m for unknown reasons). The deepest dive of
these sharks was #172241, which recorded a depth ofapproximately 1800m at which depth the tag released. The shark
may have dived deeper but we have no record past this depth.
The crush depth of these tags is es*mated at 1850m. This dive isalmost equal to the deepest dive on record of any whale shark,
which was to 1928m in 2015 that of a juvenile male. (Tyminski etal. 2015)

25

Figure 32: Whale sharkswims by out in theblue
Photo: ©Jonathan R.
Green 2018

Their dive proﬁles show that they spend most of their *me in theupper reaches of the water column with periodic deeper dives todepths of 500m or deeper. These would appear to display aregularity but the reasons for this are currently not known
One miniPAT from this season has already released due to a deep
dive. #172237 released at 1688m just 35nm west of Darwin, three
weeks ager her tagging date on the 15th September. She wasdouble tagged with ﬁn mounted SPOT6 #175950 which last gavedata just prior to this deep dive.
All ﬁve of the prototype ﬁn mounted SPOT6 tags have reported
posi*ons since they were deployed. A 100% report rate is a huge
improvement on previous years that have averaged 50%. We
currently have posi*onal data from all ﬁve in the last 10 days. See
Figures 33 & 34).

26

Figure 33 (above): showing the data from all five fin
mounted SPOT6 tags for the previous ten days on aregional scale.

Figure 34 (below): showing the data from all fivefin mounted SPOT6 tags for the previous ten days
on a more local scale.

27

Currently:#175950 is submerged having surfaced less than 5nm from
Darwin Arch two weeks ager being tagged. She dived to a depthof 1688m at which point the miniPAT #172237 released due todepth programming. Last posi*on transmission 16:20 GMT 2nd
October, (see Figure 35 below).

Figure 35: Google Earth map showing the movements of SPOT6 #175950

28

Figure 36: Google Earth map showing the movements of SPOT6 #175951#175951 surfaced ini*ally to the east of the Galapagos, travelled
north to the very rugged ﬁssure and fracture zone of theGalapagos Rig System, then turned south along a major fault line.
Last posi*on transmission 23:55 GMT on the 10th October, (seeFigure 36 above).

29

#175952 Surfaced 30nm to the NE of the northeast point of
Isabela Island. She then swam south to the shelf break oﬀ theGalapagos Pladorm and has since been swimming in a zigzag
paTern along the shelf between southern Isabela and Floreana
Islands. Last posi*on transmission at 15:14 GMT on the 10th
October, (see Figure 37).

Figure 37: Google Earth map showing the movements of SPOT6 #175952

30

Figure 38: Google Earth map showing the movements of SPOT6 #175953#175953 Surfaced 10 days ager being tagged approximately
150nm east of Darwin. She then returned to a posi*on 17nm due
north of Darwin, where she dived on a seamount. Last posi*ontransmission 00:12 GMT on the 5th October, (see Figure 38
above).

31

#175954 Surfaced very close to Darwin Arch on the 20th October,two weeks ager being tagged and then swam south to Isabela
Island, down the east coast of Isabela to the shelf break of theGalapagos Pladorm and has since been swimming in a zigzag
paTern along the shelf between southern Isabela and Floreana
Islands. Last posi*on transmission 15:02 GMT on the 11th
October, (see Figure 39).
With increased reten*on, 100% and also with the increased
baTery life, up to 1500 days for the three 257 type SPOT6 tags we
deployed this year we are hopeful of con*nuing data and updates
will be provided via the website quarterly newsleTer
hTps://www.galapagoswhaleshark.org/.
Figure 39: Google Earth map showing the movements of SPOT6 #175954

32

Figure 40: Diver with whale shark Photo: ©Jonathan R. Green 2018

CONCLUSIONS&FURTHER WORK

Despite not yet having the data necessary to determine
whether any of the huge mature female whale sharks areindeed pregnant we have achieved a massive milestone inwhale shark research.
Also very clear is that with each ﬁeld season we have beenable to improve on the techniques we are using and in thedevelopment of new ones. This par*cular ﬁeld is only now
beginning to become one of more general research andalmost all the ﬁeld equipment, techniques used for data
gathering and analysis are being developed by the
researchers in the ﬁeld. That virtually all the scien*sts andtechnical teams involved in this research openly share anddiscuss developments, their ﬁnding and techniques used, isa credit to all and displays a common goal; the beTer
understanding of this and other species in order to protect
and conserve them and their habitat. There remains muchs*ll to do if we are to achieve this…
33

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS& THANKS

Photo: Darwin‘s Arch, Galapagos ©Jonathan R. Green 201834

Figure 41: Diver
captures photo ID of apassing whale shark.
Darwin Arch. Photo:©Jonathan R. Green2018

Over the years we have had incredible support from institutions andindividuals. The Galapagos National Park Service have been stalwart
allies since the beginning. George and Kimberly Rapier… without
whom the Project would not have begun. Galapagos Conservation
Trust and the Sackler Trust, who have kept the Project afloat! Planeterra
through the G Expedition. Marine Megafauna Foundation, Galapagos
Science Center, Georgia Aquarium, Okinawa Churashima Foundation,
Fundacion Megafauna Marina del Ecuador, Doug and Debora Brown,
Johannes and Xiaoyang Schoeter, Ben Pierson, Hannah Button and all
those far too numerous to name who have helped make this Projectsuch a success. Last but certainly not least a huge thank you to
Eduardo “Vico” Rosero and the fair Queen Mabel, (our last trip
together), who together have got us safely, not always in the easiest ofseas, to Darwin and back.

Figure 42 (right):
Captain „Viko“ and theQueen Mabel. Photo:©Jonathan R. Green
2018

35

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Acuña-Marrero D, Jiménez J, Smith F, Doherty PF Jr, Hearn A, etal. (2014) Whale Shark (Rhincodon typus) Seasonal Presence, Residence Time and Habitat Use at Darwin Island, Galapagos Marine Reserve. PLoS ONE 9(12): e115946.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115946
Hearn AR, Acuña D, Ketchum JT, Peñaherrera C, Green J, Marshall A, Guerrero M, Shillinger G (2014) Elasmobranchs of the Galapagos Marine Reserve. In: Denkinger J, Vinueza L (eds)
The Galapagos Marine Reserve: social and ecological interactions in the Galapagos Islands. Springer, New York, pp 23–59
Joung SJ, Chen C-T, Clark E, Uchida S, Huang WYP (1996) The
whale shark, Rhincodon typus, is a live-bearer: 300 embryos
found in one ‘megamamma’supreme. Environ Biol Fish 46:219–
223
Martin, R. A. (2007). A review of behavioural ecology of whale
sharks (Rhincodon typus). Fisheries Research, 84(1), 10–16.
doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2006.11.010
Ryan JP, Green JR, Espinoza E, Hearn AR (2017) Association ofwhale sharks (Rhincodon typus) with thermo-biological frontal systems of the eastern tropical Pacific. PLoS ONE 12(8): e0182599.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0182599
Schmidt J, Chien-Chi C, Sheikh S, Meekan M, Norman B, Joung
SJ (2010) Paternity analysis in a litter of whale shark embryos.
Endanger Species Res 12(2): 117–124.
Tyminski JP, de la Parra-Venegas R, González Cano J, Hueter RE(2015) Vertical Movements and Patterns in Diving Behavior of
Whale Sharks as Revealed by Pop-Up Satellite Tags in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico. PLoS ONE 10(11): e0142156.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0142156

xxxvi

APPENDIX

Photo: Whale Shark dwarfs the Hammerhead sharks at Darwin‘sArch ©Jonathan R. Green 201837

#
Rhinodon
typus

Date
SPOT #

175950miniPAT #172237# Dive of the day

Photo ID

Blood
Samples

Ultrasound*

Biopsy14/9/2018 No. 1 GD 140918-1

0

1

0

14/9/2018 No. 2 GD 140918-2

1

1

0

1

2

175952

15/9/2018 No. 1 GD 150918-1

0

1

0

Total Length Observations
Doble
Tagging:
12.0m SPOT
14.0m(est.)(finmount) &MiniPAT
Left pectoral
12.0m-14.0m
fin missing the
(est)
tip.

12m (est)

Scar on left
side ID. Bit
missing on top
caudal fin.
Jagged tail andsome scars onleft side.

317223815/9/2018 No. 2 GD 150918-2

0

1

0

11m (est)

4172242

15/9/2018 No. 3 GD 150918-3

0

1

0

11m (est)

5172172175954

16/9/2018 No. 1 GD 160918 1

0

0

1

16/9/2018 No. 1

0

1

0

6

GD 160918-2

17595117224410m (est)

12m (est)

18/9/2018 No. 1

0

1

0

17/9/2018 No. 1 GD 170918-1

0

1

0

11m (est)

17/9/2018 No. 2 GD 170918 -1

0

0

0

11m (est)

17/9/2018 No. 2 GD 170918-2

0

0

0

11m (est)

17/9/2018 No. 2 GD 170918-3

0

0

0

12m (est)

17/9/2018 No. 3 GD 170918-4

1

0

0

11m (est)

17/9/2018 No. 3 GD 170918-5

1

1

0

11m (est)

Scar on left
side abdomen.

10m (est)

Far awaysighting of R
typus.

7

8

175953172243

9

10

11
12
(MysteryWS)

172173

Old fishing
injury in frontof dorsal fin(maybe an oldrope). Healed
over.
Resighted after
two days (16th& 18th of
Sept)
Doble
Tagging:
SPOT(finmount) &MiniPAT
Seen again indive 2
Doble
Tagging:
SPOT(finmount) &MiniPAT.
Jagged caudal
tail.
Only ID. Seen
during safety
stop.
Dolphins
swimming infront. Jagged
dorsal fin.

18/9/2018 No. 1

N/A

0

0

0

38

#
Rhinodon
typus

Date
SPOT #

miniPAT ## Dive of the day

Photo ID

Blood
Samples

Ultrasound*

BiopsyTotal Length Observations

13

18/9/2018 No. 1 GD 180918-2

0

0

0

5m

14
1

18/9/2018 No. 2 GD 180918-3

1

1

0

11m (est)

15

19/9/2018 No. 1 GD 190918-1

0

0

1

16

19/9/2018 No. 1 GD 190918-2

0

0

1

17

19/9/2018 No. 2 GD 190918-3

0

1

0

18

19/9/2018 No. 2 GD 190918-4

0

0

0

19

20/9/2018 No. 1 GD 200918-1

1

1

1

20

20/9/2018 No. 1 GD 200918-2

0

0

0

21

20/9/2018 No. 2 GD 200918-3

0

1

1

22

12m (est)

Juvenile R
typus, female.

Doublesighting during
same dive.
Sighted second
time at thesame time as R
typus 16.

Sighted at the
8m (est)same time as R
typus 15
Sighted at theNo estimate same time as R
typus 18
Sighted at theNo estimate same time as R
typus 17
Ovaries foundon ultrasound.
10-11m (est)
Empty?
ConcaveJuvenile R
4m (est)typus, genderuknown.
Ovaries foundon ultrasound.
12m (est)
Empty?
Concave

22/9/2018 No. 1 GD 220918-1

0

0

0

22/9/2018 No. 2

0

0

0

Strong current.
Hard to reach
R typus0Strong current.
Hard to reach
R typus22/9/2018 No.3

23

0

0

GD 220918-2

12m (est)

Strong current.
Hard to reach
R typusNo estimate

23/9/2018 No. 1

0

0

0

23/9/2018 No. 3

0

0

1

24/9/2018 No. 1

0

1

0

24/9/2018 No. 3

0

0

0

R typus at 40
m. Seen at a
distance andID as same WS
as day before.
Sighted again
and biopsied.
Seen for 3 days
straight
Seen at safety
stop

39

#
Rhinodon
typus

Date
SPOT #

miniPAT ## Dive of the day

Photo ID

Blood
Samples

Ultrasound*

BiopsyTotal Length Observations

24

23/9/2018 No. 2 GD 230918-1

0

0

0

No estimate

25
1

24/9/2018 No. 1 GD 240918-1

0

0

0

No estimate

Seen at safety
stopSeen at 33m
depth.

26

24/9/2018 No. 2 GD 240918-2

1

1

1

No estimate

R typus stayedwith divers for~10min. 3
ultrasounds ofsame
individual.

27

24/9/2018 No. 2 GD 240918-3

0

0

0

No estimate

Seen at the endof the dive24/9/2018 No. 2

0

0

0

No estimate

Seen at the endof the dive25/9/2018 No 3

0

1

0

No estimate

Spotted again
during last day29

24/9/2018 No. 3 GD 240918-5

0

1

0

No estimate

Tail slapcaught diver30

25/9/2018 No. 1 GD 250918-1

0

1

0

5m (est)Juvenile R
typus, male.

31

25/9/2018 No. 2 GD 250918-2

0

0

0

No estimate

32

25/9/2018 No. 2 GD 250918-3

0

1

0

No estimate

33

25/9/2018 No. 2 GD 250918-4

0

1

0

No estimate

25/9/2018 No. 2

0

0

0

25/9/2018 No. 3

0

0

0

35

25/9/2018 No. 2 GD 250918-6

0

0

0

4.5m (est)36

25/9/2018 No. 3 GD 250918-7

0

1

0

No estimate

6

21

7

28

GD 240918-4

34

Total

GD 250918-5

5

7

35

12m-13m (est)

Last R typus
seenJuvenile R
typus, genderuknown.
Severalultrasounds
done on thesameindividual.

* Number of utrasounds corresponds to whether an ultrasound was done on R typus during the dive. Not the individual number ofswipes.

40

Photos by Jonathan R. Green and Sofia M. Green© Jonathan R. Green & DPNG, 2015 - 2018, All Rights Reserved
Design & layout Jenny Waack
If you would like to use our photos please contact us!
Follow us:(email): galapagoswhalesharkproject@gmail.com(web): www.galapagoswhaleshark.org(facebook): www.facebook.com/galapagoswhaleshark(instagram): www.instagram.com/galapagos_whale_shark_project/(twitter): www.twitter.com/Galapagossharks(youtube): www.youtube.com/channel/UCRhn90uOoLNohk3USvq7ULw
xli