The effects of neodymium-iron-boron permanent magnets on the behaviour of the small spotted catshark (Scyliorhinus canicula) and the thornback skate (Raja clavata)

Smith, Lauren E.; O’Connell, Craig P.

doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2013.05.010

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, strong permanent magnets have been used as sources of aversive stimuli to induce avoidance behaviours in elasmobranchs, including the southern stingray Hypanus americanus (Hildebrand & Schroeder 1928) (O'Connell et al, ), Atlantic sharpnose, Rhizoprionodon terraenovae (Richardson 1837) and M. canis (O'Connell et al, ), great hammerhead shark Sphyrna mokarran (Rüppell 1837) (O'Connell et al, ), white shark Carcharodon carcharias (L. 1758) (O'Connell et al, ), lemon shark Negaprion brevirostris (Poey 1868) (O'Connell et al, , ), C. leucas (O'Connell et al, ), S. canicula and R. clavata , (Smith & O'Connell, ), C. plumbeus (Siegenthaler et al, ) and the blind shark Brachaelurus waddi (Bloch & Schneider 1801) (Richards et al, ). However, it is unclear whether the repulsive effects reported were because the test subjects responded directly to magnetic stimuli or to induced electrical artefacts.…”

Section: Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electroreception in marine fishes: chondrichthyans

Newton

Gill

Kajiura

2019

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electroreception in marine fishes occurs across a variety of taxa and is best understood in the chondrichthyans (sharks, skates, rays, and chimaeras). Here, we present an up‐to‐date review of what is known about the biology of passive electroreception and we consider how electroreceptive fishes might respond to electric and magnetic stimuli in a changing marine environment. We briefly describe the history and discovery of electroreception in marine Chondrichthyes, the current understanding of the passive mode, the morphological adaptations of receptors across phylogeny and habitat, the physiological function of the peripheral and central nervous system components, and the behaviours mediated by electroreception. Additionally, whole genome sequencing, genetic screening and molecular studies promise to yield new insights into the evolution, distribution, and function of electroreceptors across different environments. This review complements that of electroreception in freshwater fishes in this special issue, which provides a comprehensive state of knowledge regarding the evolution of electroreception. We conclude that despite our improved understanding of passive electroreception, several outstanding gaps remain which limits our full comprehension of this sensory modality. Of particular concern is how electroreceptive fishes will respond and adapt to a marine environment that is being increasingly altered by anthropogenic electric and magnetic fields.

show abstract

Section: Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electroreception in marine fishes: chondrichthyans

Newton

Gill

Kajiura

2019

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, O'Connell et al () show that G. cirratum avoided bait protected by a C8‐grade barium–ferrite magnet (150 × 100 × 50 mm; residual flux density approximately 950 G) compared to baits paired with a non‐magnetic clay brick control. Smith and O'Connell () found that S. canicula actively avoided baits protected by an N52‐grade neodymium rare‐earth magnet (20 mm diameter × 30 mm height; residual flux density approximately 14 000 G) compared to baits associated with a lead weight control.…”

Section: Shark Repellents and Their Effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Like EPMs, magnetic repellents only have a relatively short effective range because the field strength of a magnetic dipole falls off approximately as the inverse cube of the distance from the source. For example, S. canicula displayed avoidance behaviors only when they encounter flux densities of approximately 21–2152 G at a distance of approximately 2–20 cm from a powerful rare‐earth magnet (Smith & O'Connell ), which highlights the potential importance of the proximity and location of magnets relative to the bait for preventing depredation (Robbins et al ). Thus, a large number of magnets would be required to generate a magnetic repellent with extensive spatial coverage.…”

Section: Shark Repellents and Their Effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sharks senses and shark repellents

Hart

Collin

2015

Integrative Zoology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite over 70 years of research on shark repellents, few practical and reliable solutions to prevent shark attacks on humans or reduce shark bycatch and depredation in commercial fisheries have been developed. In large part, this deficiency stems from a lack of fundamental knowledge of the sensory cues that drive predatory behavior in sharks. However, the widespread use of shark repellents is also hampered by the physical constraints and technical or logistical difficulties of deploying substances or devices in an open-water marine environment to prevent an unpredictable interaction with a complex animal. Here, we summarize the key attributes of the various sensory systems of sharks and highlight residual knowledge gaps that are relevant to the development of effective shark repellents. We also review the most recent advances in shark repellent technology within the broader historical context of research on shark repellents and shark sensory systems. We conclude with suggestions for future research that may enhance the efficacy of shark repellent devices, in particular, the continued need for basic research on shark sensory biology and the use of a multi-sensory approach when developing or deploying shark repellent technology.

show abstract

“…Indeed, both laboratory experiments and field studies have found the magnets to act as a repellent (i.e. Brill et al, 2009;Rigg et al, 2009;O'Connell et al, 2010O'Connell et al, , 2011aO'Connell et al, ,b, 2014aO'Connell et al, -d, 2015Jordan et al, 2011;Smith and O'Connell, 2014;Rice, 2008;Wang et al, 2008) or an attractor or to be neutral (Stoner and Kaimmer, 2008;Rigg et al, 2009;Jordan et al, 2011;McCutcheon and Kajiura, 2013;Robbins et al, 2011;Tallack and Mandelman, 2009;O'Connell et al, 2011a,d;Hutchinson et al, 2012;Godin Cosandey et al, 2013;Smith, 2013). The same contrast results have been found for different species (both pelagic and benthic).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%