SharkBase is a global shark* encounter database helping to map the distribution and structure of shark* populations worldwide. Please get involved and become a Citizen Shark Scientist by submitting your past, present, and future shark* encounters to SharkBase. Even if you have never seen a shark in the wild, you can still contribute to SharkBase by submitting sightings that you see in the news or on the internet. For more information, watch the video below and check out the links at the top of the page.

(*Includes all sharks, rays, and chimaeras)

Open NABIS ApplicationThe purpose of this information is to show the annual distribution of the white pointer, great white sharkLineage - Document describing the data source used, history of changes, background information about the given layer, and referencesCreator - National Institute of Water and Atmospheric ResearchPublisher - Ministry for Primary IndustriesContributor - Malcolm Francis, NIWA, WellingtonCustodian - Ministry for Primary IndustriesJurisdiction of Custodian - New ZealandRights - Crown Copyright Reserved.Subject - Annual distribution of adult white pointer, great white shark within the waters around New ZealandSource - Multiple sources - see Lineage for detailsLanguage - EnglishRelation - Function - To ensure that fisheries are sustainably used within a healthy aquatic ecosystemLayer Type - biotaAudience - AllMandate - New Zealand Biodiversity StrategyProgress - CompletedMetadata - Compliant with NZGLS and ANZLICLayer InformationSpecies Common Name - Great white sharkSpecies Scientific Name - Carcharodon carcharias (Linnaeus 1758)Species Maori Name - Mango taniwha, Mango ururoa, TupaSpecies Code - WPSEndangered Status - VulnerableSeason - AnnualHabitat Type - Demersal inshoreMinimum Depth - 0 mMaximum Depth - 1200 mAccuracyAlert Level - NoneWarnings and Problems - NonePositional Accuracy - 100 kmAttribute Accuracy - Attribute data have been checked against Ministry for Primary Industries guidelines and no significant problems are known.Logical Consistency - Logical consistency has been checked against Ministry for Primary Industries guidelines and no significant problems are known.Completeness - Completeness of the information layer has been checked against independent descriptions of the distribution of the white pointer, great white shark and no significant problems are known.Certified/Refereed By - Owen Anderson (NIWA) & Clinton Duffy (DoC)Certification Date - 01/01/0001CoverageCoverage Name - Coverage: Spatial Northern - Coverage: Spatial Southern - Coverage: Spatial Eastern - Coverage: Spatial Western - Coverage: Temporal Earliest - 01/01/1872Coverage: Temporal Latest - 21/03/2011Distribution Northern - 24.00° SDistribution Southern - 53.25° SDistribution Eastern - 167.00° WDistribution Western - 157.00° EMaintenanceLayer Date Received - 07/02/2007Layer Date Loaded - 31/05/2007Layer Date Renewed - 14/01/2013Metadata Date Received - 07/02/2007Metadata Date Loaded - 31/05/2007Metadata Date Renewed - 14/01/2013Maintenance and Update Frequency - asNeededApproved for Promotion By - Information Management, Ministry for Primary IndustriesApproved for Promotion Date - 30/05/2007

This dataset contains a collection of known point locations of tiger sharks identified via automated satellite tracking of tagged organisms. This can be useful for assessing species abundance, population structure, habitat use, and behavior. This collection is aggregated from multiple tagged organisms and survey periods. Each data point contains attributes for further information about the time and source of the observation. This dataset was compiled by the Pacific Islands Ocean Observing System (PacIOOS) and may be updated in the future if additional data sources are acquired. University of Hawaii's Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology (HIMB) desploys satellite tags on tiger sharks to track their movements within the Main Hawaiian Islands as well as the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument (Northwestern Hawaiian Islands). Top predators play an important role in ecosystems by influencing prey behavior and shaping communities through trophic cascades. NOTE: This GIS layer is restricted to map images only. For all inquiries related to data access, please contact the principal investigators (PIs) directly. For further information, please see: http://www.himb.hawaii.edu/ReefPredator/Tiger%20Shark%20Research.htm

Blank or missing values are denoted as "null." "ReadMe.csv" document contains methods of collection and data header descriptions. Coordinates have been rounded to the nearest tenth to protect locations of vulnerable or endangered species.

The main sources of information for the species distribution are the habitat description and geographic range contained in the published FAO Catalogues of Species (more details at http://www.fao.org/fishery/fishfinder ). Terms used in the descriptive context of the FAO Catalogues were converted in standard depth, geographic and ecological regions and inserted into a Geographic Information System.

This product represents the predicted spatial patterns of selected temperate shark and ray species abundance. Species selection was based on ecological risk assessments, threatened species listings and data availability. The maps are based on existing CSIRO National Fish Collection maps, supplemented with fishery catch data, independent survey data and the expert knowledge of 20 shark and ray experts from the region. Structure equates to total species distribution, core distribution – an estimate of where 90% of the population will occur and where possible, nursery areas. The product can be used to identify movement corridors, breeding and feeding areas that overlap between species. This allows managers to identify areas of overlap that are of key conservation value to the species of interest.

Open NABIS ApplicationThe distribution of Porbeagle Shark is a scientific interpretation based on the best available information from published and unpublished sourcesLineage - Document describing the data source used, history of changes, background information about the given layer, and referencesCreator - National Institute of Water and Atmospheric ResearchPublisher - Ministry for Primary IndustriesContributor - Museum of New Zealand Te Papa TongarewaCustodian - Ministry for Primary IndustriesJurisdiction of Custodian - New ZealandRights - Crown Copyright Reserved.Subject - Annual fish distribution of Porbeagle Shark within the waters around New ZealandSource - Multiple sources - see Lineage for detailsLanguage - EnglishRelation - Function - To ensure that fisheries are sustainably used within a healthy aquatic ecosystemLayer Type - biotaAudience - AllMandate - New Zealand Biodiversity StrategyProgress - CompletedMetadata - Compliant with NZGLS and ANZLICLayer InformationSpecies Common Name - Porbeagle sharkSpecies Scientific Name - Lamna nasus (Bonnaterre 1788)Species Maori Name - N/ASpecies Code - POSEndangered Status - Not threatenedSeason - AnnualHabitat Type - Pelagic offshoreMinimum Depth - 0 mMaximum Depth - 370 mAccuracyAlert Level - NoneWarnings and Problems - NonePositional Accuracy - 100 kmAttribute Accuracy - Attribute data have been checked against Ministry for Primary Industries guidelines and no significant problems are known.Logical Consistency - Logical consistency has been checked against Ministry for Primary Industries guidelines and no significant problems are known.Completeness - Completeness of the information layer has been checked against independent descriptions of the distribution of Porbeagle Shark and no significant problems are knownCertified/Refereed By - Malcolm Francis, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric ResearchCertification Date - 20/09/2010CoverageCoverage Name - New Zealand Exclusive Economic ZoneCoverage: Spatial Northern - 24.00° SCoverage: Spatial Southern - 58.00° SCoverage: Spatial Eastern - 167.00° WCoverage: Spatial Western - 157.00° ECoverage: Temporal Earliest - 02/09/1978Coverage: Temporal Latest - 30/09/2008Distribution Northern - 28.00° SDistribution Southern - 58.00° SDistribution Eastern - 167.00° WDistribution Western - 157.00° EMaintenanceLayer Date Received - 07/10/2003Layer Date Loaded - 10/11/2003Layer Date Renewed - 25/09/2012Metadata Date Received - 07/10/2003Metadata Date Loaded - 10/11/2003Metadata Date Renewed - 25/09/2012Maintenance and Update Frequency - asNeededApproved for Promotion By - Information Management, Ministry for Primary IndustriesApproved for Promotion Date - 10/11/2003

Open NABIS Application

The purpose of this information is to show the annual distribution of the hammerhead shark

Lineage - Document describing the data source used, history of changes, background information about the given layer, and references
Creator - National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research
Publisher - Ministry for Primary Industries
Contributor - Malcolm Francis, NIWA, Wellington
Custodian - Ministry for Primary Industries
Jurisdiction of Custodian - New Zealand
Rights - Crown Copyright Reserved.
Subject - Annual distribution of adult hammerhead shark within the waters around New Zealand
Source - Multiple sources - see Lineage for details
Language - English
Relation -
Function - To ensure that fisheries are sustainably used within a healthy aquatic ecosystem
Layer Type - biota
Audience - All
Mandate - New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy
Progress - Completed
Metadata - Compliant with NZGLS and ANZLIC

Layer Information
Species Common Name - Hammerhead shark
Species Scientific Name - Sphyrna zygaena (Linnaeus 1758)
Species Maori Name - Kakere, Mango pare, Mangoo-pare
Species Code - HHS
Endangered Status - Lower risk
Season - Annual
Habitat Type - Demersal inshore
Minimum Depth - 0 m
Maximum Depth - 200 m

Accuracy
Alert Level - None
Warnings and Problems - None
Positional Accuracy - 100 km
Attribute Accuracy - Attribute data have been checked against Ministry for Primary Industries guidelines and no significant problems are known.
Logical Consistency - Logical consistency has been checked against Ministry for Primary Industries guidelines, and no significant problems are known.
Completeness - Completeness of the information layer has been checked against independent descriptions of the distribution of the hammerhead shark and no significant problems are known.
Certified/Refereed By - Owen Anderson (NIWA) & Clinton Duffy (DoC)
Certification Date - 01/01/0001

Coverage
Coverage Name -
Coverage: Spatial Northern -
Coverage: Spatial Southern -
Coverage: Spatial Eastern -
Coverage: Spatial Western -
Coverage: Temporal Earliest - 01/01/1872
Coverage: Temporal Latest - 10/04/2011
Distribution Northern - 28.62° S
Distribution Southern - 42.64° S
Distribution Eastern - 177.77° W
Distribution Western - 167.62° E

Maintenance
Layer Date Received - 07/02/2007
Layer Date Loaded - 31/05/2007
Layer Date Renewed - 14/01/2013
Metadata Date Received - 07/02/2007
Metadata Date Loaded - 31/05/2007
Metadata Date Renewed - 14/01/2013
Maintenance and Update Frequency - asNeeded
Approved for Promotion By - Information Management, Ministry for Primary Industries
Approved for Promotion Date - 30/05/2007

The main sources of information for the species distribution are the habitat description and geographic range contained in the published FAO Catalogues of Species (more details at http://www.fao.org/fishery/fishfinder ). Terms used in the descriptive context of the FAO Catalogues were converted in standard depth, geographic and ecological regions and inserted into a Geographic Information System.

Open NABIS ApplicationThe distribution of Pale Ghost Shark is a scientific interpretation based on the best available information from published and unpublished sourcesLineage - Document describing the data source used, history of changes, background information about the given layer, and referencesCreator - National Institute of Water and Atmospheric ResearchPublisher - Ministry for Primary IndustriesContributor - Museum of New Zealand Te Papa TongarewaCustodian - Ministry for Primary IndustriesJurisdiction of Custodian - New ZealandRights - Crown Copyright Reserved.Subject - Annual fish distribution of Pale Ghost Shark within the waters around New ZealandSource - Multiple sources - see Lineage for detailsLanguage - EnglishRelation - N/AFunction - To ensure that fisheries are sustainably used within a healthy aquatic ecosystemLayer Type - biotaAudience - AllMandate - New Zealand Biodiversity StrategyProgress - CompletedMetadata - Compliant with NZGLS and ANZLICLayer InformationSpecies Common Name - Pale ghost sharkSpecies Scientific Name - Hydrolagus bemisi Didier 2002Species Maori Name - N/ASpecies Code - GSPEndangered Status - Not threatenedSeason - AnnualHabitat Type - Demersal offshoreMinimum Depth - 200 mMaximum Depth - 1300 mAccuracyAlert Level - NoneWarnings and Problems - NonePositional Accuracy - 100 kmAttribute Accuracy - Attribute data have been checked against Ministry for Primary Industries guidelines and no significant problems are known.Logical Consistency - Logical consistency has been checked against Ministry for Primary Industries guidelines and no significant problems are known.Completeness - Completeness of the information layer has been checked against independent descriptions of the distribution of Pale Ghost Shark and no significant problems are knownCertified/Refereed By - C. D. Paulin, Museum of New Zealand Te PapaCertification Date - 03/09/2003CoverageCoverage Name - New Zealand Exclusive Economic ZoneCoverage: Spatial Northern - 24.00° SCoverage: Spatial Southern - 58.00° SCoverage: Spatial Eastern - 167.00° WCoverage: Spatial Western - 157.00° ECoverage: Temporal Earliest - 22/01/1965Coverage: Temporal Latest - 31/07/2003Distribution Northern - 28.71° SDistribution Southern - 53.90° SDistribution Eastern - 173.86° WDistribution Western - 163.23° EMaintenanceLayer Date Received - 11/09/2003Layer Date Loaded - 15/10/2003Layer Date Renewed - Metadata Date Received - 11/09/2003Metadata Date Loaded - 15/10/2003Metadata Date Renewed - Maintenance and Update Frequency - asNeededApproved for Promotion By - Information Management, Ministry for Primary IndustriesApproved for Promotion Date - 29/09/2003

The main sources of information for the species distribution are the habitat description and geographic range contained in the published FAO Catalogues of Species (more details at http://www.fao.org/fishery/fishfinder ). Terms used in the descriptive context of the FAO Catalogues were converted in standard depth, geographic and ecological regions and inserted into a Geographic Information System.

In 2023, there were a total of 69 unprovoked shark attacks on humans worldwide. This was an increase in comparison to the previous year. Ten of those shark attacks were fatal.

Regional Population Connectivity, Oceanic Habitat, and Return Migration Revealed by Satellite Tagging of White Sharks, Carcharodon carcharias, at New Zealand Aggregation Sites.

A joint NIWA/Department of Conservation (DOC) tagging programme was launched in 2005. Hi-tech electronic tags are being used to gather information on where the sharks are and when, and to record their depth and the temperature of the surrounding water. Three tag types have been used: popup archival tags, acoustic tags, and dorsal fin tags.

Popup tags are implanted in the muscle under the dorsal fin with a tagging pole, and record depth, temperature and location, storing the data for up to a year. They then release themselves from the shark, float to the surface, and transmit summaries of the data to a satellite. If the tags are physically recovered, the high resolution data collected at one minute intervals can be downloaded. Popup tags provide only approximate location data, so they are most useful for tracking long-distance migrations.

Acoustic tags send out coded, individually identifiable sound ‘pings’ that can be detected up to a kilometre away by acoustic data loggers. The tag batteries last long enough to monitor the presence of white sharks in the region in the vicinity of a data logger for two years. Acoustic tags provide accurate fine-scale information on sharks at specific locations.

Dorsal fin tags bridge the gap between popup and acoustic tags. They provide accurate location information by transmitting to orbiting satellites every time the shark is at the surface and the dorsal fin and the tag’s aerial are exposed to air. Their batteries can last for more than one year, so both fine scale and large scale movement patterns can be recorded. However, dorsal fin tags are more difficult to deploy: the shark has to be caught and restrained while the tag is attached to the dorsal fin. So far, only a few of these tags have been deployed in New Zealand.

Since 2005, 44 white sharks have been tagged with popup tags, mainly at the Chatham Islands and Stewart Island. These islands support large colonies of fur seals, which are a major food source for white sharks. Our research has focussed on Stewart Island since 2009. The population there is dominated by males (about 2.2 males for every female). Nearly all of the females are immature, being shorter than the female length at maturity of 4.5 to 5 m. Only about one-third of the males are longer than the male length at maturity of about 3.6 m. This indicates that the white shark aggregations at Stewart Island are not related to mating, and are most likely driven by the abundance of seals for food. Large, mature females are rarely seen anywhere in New Zealand and their distribution, habitat and behaviour are almost completely unknown.

Tagging results show that most New Zealand white sharks make annual migrations to tropical waters in winter, travelling as far as 3,300 km away. Sharks have migrated to the Great Barrier Reef in Australia, the Coral Sea, New Caledonia, Vanuatu, Norfolk Island, Fiji and Tonga. They don't cross the equator.

Most of the sharks from Stewart Island headed northwest of New Zealand, whereas most Chatham Islands sharks headed north. However, some sharks from the two tagging locations overlap in the tropics. Surprisingly, we have not detected any direct movement between Stewart and Chatham islands.

Some popup tags have remained on the sharks for long enough (up to one year) to reveal that the sharks returned to their tagging locations after their tropical holiday. This has been confirmed by photo-identification work at Stewart Island. Each shark has a unique colour pattern, particularly around the gills and on the tail. Some individuals have been seen at Stewart Island each year for multiple years. This indicates that white sharks have a sophisticated navigation mechanism that enables them to make major direct oceanic migrations, and then return to precisely the spot they left from. We do not know how they achieve this.

Understanding how interactions among microevolutionary forces generate genetic population structure of exploited species is vital to the implementation of management policies that facilitate population persistence. Philopatry displayed by many coastal shark species can impact gene flow and facilitate selection, and thus has direct implications for the spatial scales of management plans. Here, genetic structure of the blacktip shark (Carcharhinus limbatus) was examined using a mixed-marker approach based on mitochondrial control region sequences and 4,339 SNP-containing loci generated using ddRAD-Seq. Genetic variation was assessed among young-of-the-year sampled in 11 sites in waters of the United States in the western North Atlantic Ocean, including the Gulf of Mexico. Spatial and environmental analyses detected 68 nuclear loci putatively under selection, enabling separate assessments of neutral and adaptive genetic structure. Both mitochondrial and neutral SNP data indicated three genetically distinct units – the Atlantic, eastern Gulf, and western Gulf – that align with regional stocks and suggest regional philopatry by males and females. Heterogeneity at loci putatively under selection, associated with temperature and salinity, was observed among sites within Gulf units, suggesting local adaptation. Furthermore, five pairs of siblings were identified in the same site across timescales corresponding with female reproductive cycles. This indicates that females re-used a site for parturition, which has the potential to facilitate the sorting of adaptive variation among neighboring sites. The results demonstrate differential impacts of microevolutionary forces at varying spatial scales and highlight the importance of conserving essential habitats to maintain sources of adaptive variation that may buffer species against environmental change. Methods Fin clips were collected from blacktip sharks (Carcharhinus limbatus) within or near 11 estuaries used for parturition in waters of the United States in the western North Atlantic Ocean. A modified version of double digest restriction-site associated DNA sequencing (ddRAD-Seq) was used to prepare genomic libraries containing 488 young-of-the-year individuals plus technical replicates, which were sequenced using 11 lanes of an Illumina HiSeq 4000 (paired-end 150 bp reads). To map and improve the genotyping efficacy of HiSeq data, a separate library consisting of 27 individuals sampled across Atlantic and Gulf locations at multiple life-history stages was prepared using the same protocol but sequenced on an Illumina MiSeq lane (paired-end 300 bp reads). All MiSeq and HiSeq reads were quality-trimmed using default parameters in dDocent. dDocent was also used to assemble MiSeq reads into a reduced genomic reference. dDocent was then used to map HiSeq reads to the MiSeq reference and genotype SNPs. SNPs were filtered using VCFtools and R functions in a customized workflow. Subsequently, haplotypes were generated by collapsing SNPs on the same contig to produce a multi-allelic SNP-containing loci dataset. Technical replicates and non-randomly sampled kin were then removed. In addition, a 915 bp portion of the mitochondrial control region (1070 bp total length) was amplified for a subset of individuals.

The main sources of information for the species distribution are the habitat description and geographic range contained in the published FAO Catalogues of Species (more details at http://www.fao.org/fishery/fishfinder ). Terms used in the descriptive context of the FAO Catalogues were converted in standard depth, geographic and ecological regions and inserted into a Geographic Information System.

Open NABIS ApplicationThe purpose of this information is to show the Annual juvenile distribution of Seal sharkLineage - Document describing the data source used, history of changes, background information about the given layer, and referencesCreator - National Institute of Water and Atmospheric ResearchPublisher - Ministry for Primary IndustriesContributor - Dr Malcolm Francis, NIWA WellingtonCustodian - Ministry for Primary IndustriesJurisdiction of Custodian - New ZealandRights - Crown Copyright Reserved.Subject - Annual distribution of juvenile seal shark within the waters around New ZealandSource - Multiple sources - see Lineage for detailsLanguage - EnglishRelation - Annual adult distribution of Seal SharkFunction - To ensure that fisheries are sustainably used within a healthy aquatic ecosystemLayer Type - biotaAudience - AllMandate - New Zealand Biodiversity StrategyProgress - CompletedMetadata - Compliant with NZGLS and ANZLICLayer InformationSpecies Common Name - Seal sharkSpecies Scientific Name - Dalatias licha (Bonnaterre 1788)Species Maori Name - N/ASpecies Code - BSHEndangered Status - Not threatenedSeason - SpawningHabitat Type - Demersal offshoreMinimum Depth - 183 mMaximum Depth - 1072 mAccuracyAlert Level - 1Warnings and Problems - Seal sharks are not commonly measured by observers or on trawl surveys, and the distribution of juveniles is probably more even than the patchy records indicate.Positional Accuracy - 100 kmAttribute Accuracy - Attribute data has been checked against Ministry for Primary Industries guidelines and no significant problems are known.Logical Consistency - Logical consistency has been checked against Ministry for Primary Industries guidelines, and no significant problems are known.Completeness - Completeness of the information layer has been checked against independent descriptions of the distribution of Seal shark and no significant problems are knownCertified/Refereed By - Owen Anderson, NIWA, WellingtonCertification Date - 05/12/2005CoverageCoverage Name - New ZealandCoverage: Spatial Northern - 24.00° SCoverage: Spatial Southern - 58.00° SCoverage: Spatial Eastern - 167.00° WCoverage: Spatial Western - 157.00° ECoverage: Temporal Earliest - 04/02/1990Coverage: Temporal Latest - 17/12/2003Distribution Northern - 34.11° SDistribution Southern - 49.37° SDistribution Eastern - 174.04° WDistribution Western - 166.05° EMaintenanceLayer Date Received - 28/10/2005Layer Date Loaded - 25/08/2006Layer Date Renewed - Metadata Date Received - 28/10/2005Metadata Date Loaded - 25/08/2006Metadata Date Renewed - 11/04/2011Maintenance and Update Frequency - asNeededApproved for Promotion By - Information Management, Ministry for Primary IndustriesApproved for Promotion Date - 29/08/2006

The main sources of information for the species distribution are the habitat description and geographic range contained in the published FAO Catalogues of Species (more details at http://www.fao.org/fishery/fishfinder ). Terms used in the descriptive context of the FAO Catalogues were converted in standard depth, geographic and ecological regions and inserted into a Geographic Information System.

Fishery-independent data from the Federal/State/University cooperative Southeast Area Monitoring and Assessment Program (SEAMAP) and the National Marine Fisheries Service Southeast Fisheries Science Center were used to generate maps of station locations, sampling effort and distribution and abundance of selected fish, shark and invertebrate species. The map layers for each species were summarized from SEAMAP Fall Plankton (1986-2016), SEAMAP Summer and Fall Bottom Trawl (1987-2018), SEAMAP Reef Fish Video (1995-2017) and NMFS Bottom Longline (2001-2018) surveys. Species specific information may be documented for a single or multiple surveys dependent upon available data.

This project examined that past and present distribution of oyster reefs in the western Everglades from Lopez River to Shark River / White Water Bay complex. Using geological, geochemical, and biological techniques, the distribution of oysters (past and present) and the influence of environmental factors on oyster reef development were examined. The study examined two phases: (1) the past distribution and history of reef development during late Holocene and the influence reef development has had (or not had) on coastal geomorphology, and (2) the present distribution of oyster reefs and their physiological and ecological state in the Everglades coastal complex. This distribution and state of health is presumably indicative of the water quality, specifically the salinity and sedimentologic regimes of these watersheds. To quantify the distribution of extant reef-building organisms within the study area, oyster reefs within seven estuaries were mapped and a spatial analysis was performed. Furthermore, the presence of oysters encrusting fringing mangrove prop-roots was mapped to determine whether apparent trends in oyster reef distribution were the result of water quality or substrate limitation. The spatial analysis was conducted by calculating the total area of oyster reefs within five quadrants located along the estuarine axis within the Chatham, Lostmans, and Broad Rivers. These data were then compared to the results of Savarese et al. (2004) that used similar techniques to quantify the distribution of oyster reefs within Blackwater Bay, Pumpkin Bay, Faka Union Bay, and Fakahatchee Bay of the Ten Thousand Islands (TTI). Results from the comparison show that oyster reefs are relatively well distributed throughout the TTI, while the distribution of oyster reefs within the estuaries composing the Everglades Estuarine Tract (EET) are restricted to the mouths of these rivers. This is likely the result of regional differences in watersheds producing distinct water quality in the EET and TTI. In order to document historic coastal processes and predict future responses of those processes to accelerated sea-level rise (SLR) associated with global warming, a stratigraphic study was undertaken. To document the regional stratigraphy five sediment core transects, each containing 4-6 cores, were completed from the Fakahatchee estuary (TTI), Chatham River (transition region), Lostmans River (EET), Broad River (EET), and the inner bays of the EET. To characterize the present distribution of oyster reefs, in addition to spatially mapping their distribution, oyster health measures (disease prevalence and intensity of the oyster disease Perkinsus marinus, condition index, reproduction, spat recruitment, growth and survival of juveniles, and living densities of oysters) were examined along a salinity gradient in a typical estuary, Lostmans River.

The main sources of information for the species distribution are the habitat description and geographic range contained in the published FAO Catalogues of Species (more details at http://www.fao.org/fishery/fishfinder ). Terms used in the descriptive context of the FAO Catalogues were converted in standard depth, geographic and ecological regions and inserted into a Geographic Information System.