Back

Integrating migratory marine connectivity into shark conservation

Feitosa Bezerra, D.; Bentley, L.; Dwyer, R.; Nisthar, D.; Richardson, A. J.; Simpfendorfer, C.; Heupel, M.; Rohner, C.; Pierce, S.; Dunn, D.

2025-10-27 ecology
10.1101/2025.10.27.684680 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Understanding migratory connectivity is important for the conservation of highly mobile marine species that face escalating threats across the globe. Establishing baseline information on migratory connectivity is therefore needed to identify regions of conservation focus. Despite efforts to track migratory sharks and rays, information on transboundary movements is limited and often inaccessible to managers and policymakers. Here, we synthesised multimethod movement data for migratory Australian shark and ray species, investigating which species require international engagement to support their population recovery. Based on data from a systematic literature review, we built connectivity networks from telemetry and mark-recapture studies that provide a first baseline for transboundary migratory connectivity for Australian sharks and rays. Of the 31 shark and ray species reviewed, we identified 6 species that link the Australian Exclusive Economic Zone to other national jurisdictions via multispecies migratory connections through the Tasman Sea to New Zealand, through the Tasman and Coral Sea to New Caledonia, and north across the Timor Sea and Torres Strait to Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. White sharks (Carcharhinus carcharias) and whale sharks (Rhincodon typus) were the most data rich, whereas 14 shark and ray species had no movement information. There is a grave deficiency in available information for endangered or critically endangered migratory shark and ray populations, with 76% having only one or no published studies. This work supports future conservation strategies for migratory sharks that require robust international collaboration and the adoption of integrated and dynamic management approaches.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Conservation Letters
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.6%
2
Biological Conservation
43 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.0%
3
Frontiers in Marine Science
55 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.1%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 25%
6.8%
5
Conservation Science and Practice
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
6
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.3%
7
Conservation Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.9%
50% of probability mass above
8
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 25%
3.6%
9
Global Ecology and Conservation
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.6%
10
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 38%
3.6%
11
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
12
Animal Conservation
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
13
Diversity and Distributions
26 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
14
Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
15
Global Change Biology
69 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.9%
16
Communications Earth & Environment
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
17
Biodiversity and Conservation
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
18
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
19
Marine Ecology Progress Series
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
20
Conservation Genetics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
21
Animals
20 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
22
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 60%
0.9%
23
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
24
Ecological Applications
28 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
25
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 20%
0.7%
26
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 46%
0.7%
27
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 16%
0.7%