The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Standardized diet compositions and trophic levels of sharks
Open accessAbstract
Sharks are marine consumers believed to occupy top positions in marine food webs. But surprisingly, trophic level estimates for these predators are almost non-existent. With the hope of helping better define the ecological role of sharks in marine communities, this paper presents standardized diet compositions and trophic levels calculated for a suite of species. Dietary composition for each species was derived from published quantitative studies using a weighted average index that takes into account sample size in each study. The trophic level (TL) values of the 11 food types used to characterize the diet (obtained from published accounts) were then used to calculate fractional trophic levels for 149 species representing eight orders and 23 families. Sharks as a group are tertiary consumers (TL>4), and significant differences were found among the six orders compared, which were attributable to differences between orectolobiforms (TL<4) and all other orders, and between hexanchiforms and both carcharhiniforms and squatiniforms. Among four families of carcharhiniform sharks, carcharhinids (TL=4.1, n=39) had a significantly higher TL than triakids (TL=3.8, n=19) and scyliorhinids (TL=3.9, n=21), but not sphyrnids (TL=3.9, n=6). When compared to trophic levels for other top predators of marine communities obtained from the literature, mean TL for sharks was significantly higher than for seabirds (n=28), but not for marine mammals (n=97). Trophic level and body size were positively correlated (rs=0.33), with the fit increasing (rs=0.41) when the three predominantly zooplanktivorous sharks were omitted, and especially when considering only carcharhinid sharks (rs=0.55).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Dalsgaard, J., Froese, R., & Torres, F. (1998) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.279.5352.860 · Cited by 4,743
Brooks, J. L., & Dodson, S. I. (1965) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.150.3692.28 · Cited by 3,280
Christensen, V., & Pauly, D. (1992) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/0304-3800(92)90016-8 · Cited by 1,347
Cited by
Loss of Large Predatory Sharks from the Mediterranean Sea
FERRETTI, F., MYERS, R. A., SERENA, F., & LOTZE, H. K. (2008) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00938.x · Cited by 555
Whitney, N. M., Pyle, R. L., Holland, K. N., & Barcz, J. T. (2012) · Environmental Biology of Fishes · doi:10.1007/s10641-011-9897-9 · Cited by 68
Potential detection of illegal fishing by passive acoustic telemetry
Tickler, D. M., Carlisle, A. B., Chapple, T. K., Curnick, D. J., Dale, J. J., Schallert, R. J., & Block, B. A. (2019) · Animal Biotelemetry · doi:10.1186/s40317-019-0163-9 · Cited by 51
Metadata
- Authors
- CORTES, E.
- Venue
- ICES Journal of Marine Science
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1999-10
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 707-717
- ISSN
- 1054-3139 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2130534187
- Cited by
- 968
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 7.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Standardized diet compositions and trophic levels of sharks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1006/jmsc.1999.0489
- The paper
- CORTES, E. (1999). Standardized diet compositions and trophic levels of sharks. ICES Journal of Marine Science. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmsc.1999.0489
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.