the geographical distribution of the whale-shark (rhineodon typus)

GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION O F THE WHALE.SHARK . 863

66 . The Geographical Distribution of the Whale-Shark (Rhineodon t y p w ) . By E . W . GUDGER. Bibliographer and Associate in Ichthyology. American Museum of Natural History. New York City* .

[Received May 3. 1934 : Read November 6. 1934.1

(Plate I.? ; Text-figures 1 & 2.)

CONTENTS . Introduction ............................................... Discovery of the Whale-Shark in Table Bay. Cape of Good

Hope. 1828 .............................................. Rhineodon typus in the Indian Ocean .........................

The Chagrin among the Seychelles ..................... Rhineodon in the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rhineodon in the Waters around India .....................

Off the West Coast of India ......................... Around Ceylon .................................... I n the Bay ofBengal ...............................

Rhineodon in the Western Pacific ............................. Rhineodon in the Gulf of Siam ........................... Rh ineodon in the East Indies ............................

Off the North Coast of Java .......................... Off the South-east Coast of Papua .................... Among the Islands of the Celebes Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Off the Coasts of Borneo ...........................

The Chacon in the Philippine Archipelago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rhineodon among the Bonin Islands Rhineodon off Japan ....................................

......................

Rhineodon in the Central Pacific: Rhineodon in the Taumotu Islands ........................

llhineodon on the West Coast of the Americas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rhineodon in the Gulf of California Rhineodon at Acapulco, Mexico .......................... The Tintoreva in Panama Bay ........................ Rhineodon in the Galapagos Islands .......................

Rhineodon typus at the Cape of Good Hope ....................

.............................

.......................

Rhineodon off Callao, Peru .............................. Rhineodon in the Atlantic Ocean and in certain of its Subdivisions .

Rhineodon in the Gulf of Guinea ........................ Rhineodon off the Abrolhos Light, Brazil .................. Rhineodon in the Caribbean Sea ......................... The Giant Shark in Yucatan Waters ...................... Rhineodon off Havana Harbour .......................... Rhineodon on the Coaste of Florida .......................

Total Number of Specimens of Rhineodon reported .............

Page 864

864 865 865 866 860 866 866 867 868 868 868 868 868 868 869 869 872 872 874 874 874 874 876 876 877 877 878 878 878 878 879 879 880 880 882

* Communicated by WILLIAM K . GREGORY. P.M.Z.S. t For explanation of the Plate. see p . 883 .

56*

864 MR. E. W. QUDGER O N THE GEOGRAPHICAL

The Scientific Names of the Whale-Shark ...................... Genera and Species in the Family Rhineodontidre Summary of the Distribution of Rhineodon typus . ............... Centre of Origin and Dispersal of Rhineodon typus .............. Metshod of Dispersal ........................................

Mode of Dispersal in the Eastern and Central Pacific. ........ Manner of Migration in the Western Pacific ................ How Rhineodon was distributed in the Indian Ocean Aids to Dispersal in the Atlantic Ocean

..............

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

General Summary .......................................... Bibliography ..............................................

Page 883 883 886 886 888 888 889 889 889 890 890

INTRODUCTION. Late in July 1912 I saw a t Miami, Florida, the skin of the 38-foot Whale-

Shark captured a t Knights Key in the preceding month. In August 1913 I put on record the capture of this shark-the second occurrence in Florida waters. In 1915 I published an extensive article on the natural history of this great fish, in which all the literature then known to me was reviewed in an effort to bring together in orderly fashion all that had been recorded about Rhineodon typus. In the years since, as information has come in, I have published many faunal notes recording its occurrence in the Atlantic and its subsidiaries, on the Pacific coast of the two Americas, and elsewhere. As a result of this work I have long had i t in mind to prepare an article on the geographical distribution of Rhineodon, and I now have pleasure in fulfilling that intent.

The distribution of the Whale-Shark will be given by regions, and under these chronologically, SO far as possible. Furthermore, an effort will be made to show how these regions may possibly be linked through the migrations of the fish, helped by winds and ocean currents.

DISCOVERY OF THE WHALE-SHARK IN TABLE BAY, CAPE OF GOOD HOPE, 1828.

On a morning in April, 106 years ago, some fishermen, plying their trade in Table Bay, saw swimming near them a large shark of most unusual coloration. They easily harpooned it, and, since i t offered little resistance, readily secured it. When it was brought to shore, fortunately for the science of ichthyology, i t fell into the hands of Dr. Andrew Smith, who was surgeon to the troops stationed a t Cape Town. He had a drawing made of it, dissected it, and mote a brief description which was published in 1829, without any figure however. Thus was put on record the discovery of one of the smallest known specimens (15 feet) of the largest of the sharks.

The skin of this shark was purchased for six pounds sterling and forwarded to the Museum dHistoire Naturelle in Paris, where i t was mounted. For an outline sketch of this mounted specimen see Gudger, 1931, text-fig. 3.

AS noted no figure of this remarkable find was included in the account of its discovery, and furthermore the publication of the figure was delayed for twenty years. During the years from 1838-50 Smith published in five volumes his Illustrations of the Zoology of South Africa. Volume iv. I Pisces, appeared in 1849. In it is found the first published figure (a hand-coloured one) of Rhineodon typus. Accompanying this figure is the most extensive and accurate description extant of the fish and its anatomy.

DISTRIBUTION O F THE WHALE-SHARK. 865

RHINEODON TYPCIS IN THE INDIAN OCEAN. For reasons which will be apparent when an attempt is made to account

for the distribution of the Whale-Shark it seems best to locate first those specimens of this great shark in the smallest ocean in which i t is found.

The Chagrin among the Seychelles. About 600 miles north-east of Madagascar and about 4 degrees south

of the equator is found the collection of rocky islands and coral-reefs known as the Seychelles. To these islands there came in 1868 for a six months stay a young Irish naturalist, E. Perceval Wright, the first scientific man to make known the occurrence of the Whale-Shark in the Seychelles. He made photographs of two specimens (male and female), dissected two other fish, and saw various others in the waters about the islands. He unfortunately made but little of his opportunities, for he published no article on Rhineodon, nor were his photographs of it ever reproduced-indeed, these have since been lost. However he did put the fish on record, though in a very obscure way. First he published privately in Dublin in 1868 as a 16-page pamphlet a short article entitled Six Months at the Seychelles. In 1870, he republished in Dublin this pamphlet and other articles (mainly on Seychelles plants and animals) as a book, Specilegia Biologica, of which only seventy-five copies were issued. He set out the facts about Rhineodon a t the Seychelles incidentally in other public&ions issued in 1877 and 1879. For all these see the Bibliography at the end of this paper.

To Wrights data has been added further detailed information that has come to me in letters from 1914 to 1925 from Mr. P. R. Dupont, Director of the Botanic Station on Mah6 Island. M i . Dupont has seen or heard of a t least a dozen specimens. This great shark may be seen throughout the year, but it comes inshore at those times (May to August) when Caranx gymnostothoides and certain small sardines (called tauve ) and small octopuses (called vauve ) come inshore under the influence of the south-east trade-winds. The Whale- Shark does not feed upon the Caranxes, but both feed on the sardines and octopuses. This association between the Carangid fishes and the Whale-Sharks is notable in the light of similar instances to be set forth later. The reader interested in these observations is referred to a recent article of mine in Nature (1932 b ) giving them in some detail. These accounts, old and new, show that Rhineodon is abundant in these islands, and i t may be inferred that it breeds there.

Rhineodon in the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb. This is another and new locality for Rhineodon in the Indian Ocean, and

one as yet not recorded in the literature, but contained in a note from Dr. H. C. Delsman of Batavia, Java. He writes that : In going from the Dutch East Indies to Europe our boat caught a Rhineodon on its bow in the entrance to the Red Sea, the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb. It was impaled just behind the pectoral fin, and the animal, although living and lashing its mighty tail, could not get loose, and might have remained in this position for hours if the ship had not been stopped to get rid of it. I could then see perfectly well the shape, the white belly, and the black back with the white spots and lines. I estimate the length a t about 6 metres (20 feet).

Since the above was written, Delsman has published (1934) the details of this curious capture. As will be seen later, two other Whale-Sharks have been captured in the same way, i . e., by being speared on the bow of a steamship.

866 MR. E. W. GUDGER ON THE GEOGRAPHICAL

Rhineodon in the Wwters around lndia. As will now be shown the Whale-Shark has been taken in fair numbers on

both coasts of the Indian peninsula, and even more abundantly a t its tip- around Ceylon.

Off the West Coast of India. The first account for this region is found in a coniinunication froin

Dr. George Buist (1850) at Bombay. About this time an extensive native fishery for sharks was carried on in the Indian Ocean off Kurrachee, in the north-west part of the peninsula. The information about this industry was collected on the spot and sent by a correspondent a t Kurrachee to Buist a t Bombay, and by him forwarded to England and published. Smong the sharks taken he specifically mentions the " Great Basking Shark or Mhor," which, he says, reaches a length of 40 and sometimes 60 feet-the mouth in such a specimen reaching a width of 4 feet. No mention of the spots is made (Buist did not see the fish himself), but its gigantic size and cavernous mouth would seem to make i t the Whale-Shark, which, like Cetorhinus, the true basking shark, is frequently found a t the surface with the dorsal fin out of water. Furthermore Cetorhinus, which has a comparatively small mouth, has (so far as I know) never been taken in the northern Indian Ocean : it is primarily a cool-water shark.

The other records of the Whale-Shark on the west coast of India are for the state of Travancore, at the south-west tip of the peninsula. Pillay (1929), Curator of the Trevandrum Museum, states that i t contains a painted plaster cast of a la-foot 7-inch specimen, but gives no date for its capture. However, he records a length of 29 feet for another specimen which came ashore at Trevandrum in 1900.

The " Mhor ') must have been the Whale-Shark.

Around Ceylon. No other Whale-Sharks, so far as known, have been taken on the west coast

of India, but at the southern tip, i. e., around Ceylon, a number have been seen or captured. The earliest record is that of Captain James Steuart (1862). In speaking of the pearl fishery he says that sharks are common, and states that " . . . on two occasions my attention has been called to spotted ones of such monstrous size as to make the common ones at their sides appear like pilot-fish."

In 1883, and again in 1884, Haly recorded the capture of a comparatively small specimen (23 feet 9 inches long) a t Moratuwa, near Colombo; this was mounted and is on exhibit in the Colombo Museum ; for a figure of it, see Gudger (1931, pl. xxx.). Haly (1890) also recorded the capture in 1889 of an 18-foot specimen at Negombo, on the western shore just north of Colombo. The skin was sent to the British Museum and mounted ; for a figure of i t see Giinther (1889) and Gudger (1931, pl. xxxi.). Lastly, Thurston (1894)) in a footnote to his account presently to be noted, stated that in April 1890 a small specimen (14.5 feet long) was taken off Bambalapitiya. I have been unable to locate this place, but it is interesting to note that the other two mentioned above came from the west coast of Ceylon, and further that all three specimens were relatively small fish.

In addition to the foregoing substantiated accounts of the Whale-Shark in the waters of Ceylon there are several doubtful ones, and an incidental note on its presumed manner of reproduction which seems to be based on an erroneous identification. These matters need to be cleared up, but such explanations

DISTRIBUTION O F THE WHALE-SHARK. 867

are not a part of this paper on distribution. Hence these data, together with the substantiated occurrences, have been set out in a separate article (Gudger, 1933 b ) to which the interested reader is referred.

Pearson (1933) comments on the small number of specimens recorded for Ceylon in my article, but thinks i t possible that the fish may he more common than the numbers recorded would lead one to believe.

In the Bay of Bengal. The earliest account of the Whale-Shark on the eastern side of the penin-

sula of India is from the pen of W. Foley (1835). There can be no doubt that he saw a Rhineodon. He speaks of it as of the size of a whale, but differing from that animal in shape ) ; and of its body covered with brown spots like a leopard ) ; and of its very large mouth. This great fish was sighted on a voyage to Madras, and presumably near that city.

Another specimen must be credited to this region. Thurston (1890) recorded one over 20 feet long as having come ashore a t Madras in 1889. This account he somewhat elaborated in a later publication (1894)) in which he corrected the measurement to 22 feet and gave an excellent ferro-cyanide figure of the fish as mounted for the Madras Museum ; for a reproduction of this figure see Gudger, 1931, pl. xxxii. fig. 1.

The Whale-Shark in these waters is next heard of a t the mouth of the Hooghly River, recorded by Lloyd (1908). This was a small specimen (14 feet long). The description of its colour and of its teeth definitely justify the diagnosis of it as a Whale-Shark.

In 1889 Gunther published a short note on the Whale-Shark in the Indo- Pacific Region, referring to Smiths, Wrights, and Halys discoveries, and to one in the Eastern Pacific presently to be noted. His article adds no new data, but contains a good figure of the mounted skin in the British Museum already referred to.

The small size of most of these Indian and Ceylonese Rhineodons indicates that they were immature, and leads to the conclusion that the fish probably breeds in these waters.

The recapitulation of the facts noted in this section for the distribution of the Whale-Shark in the Indian Ocean is shown in graphic fashion in Table I. The sign + indicates that a number were seen but not counted and not recorded in any publication.

TABLE 1.-Distribution of Rhineodon in the Indian Ocean.

Date.

1868 . . 1925 . . 1933 .. 1850 .. 1900 .. 1862 . . 1883 . . 1889 .. 1890 .. 1835 .. 1880 . . 1908 . .

Locality. I No. Seychelles Islands. Seychelles Islands. Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb. Off Kurrachee, India. Off Travancore, India. Off Ceylon. Moratuwa, Ceylon. Negombo, Ceylon. Bambalapitiya, Ceylon. Off Madras, Bay of Bengal. At Madras, Bay of Bengal. Mouth Hoogly R., Bay of Bengal

Total number from Indian Oceai

4 + 1 + 2 2+ 1 1 1 1 1 1 -

16+

Reporter.

E. P. Wright (1868). 1. R. Dupont (lettere) ; Gudger (1032). Delsman (1934). Buist (1850). Pillay (1929). Steuart (1862). Haly (1883, 1884). Haly (1890). Thurston (1894). Foley (1835). Thurston (1890, 1891). Lloyd (1908).


RHIA~EODON IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC. The Pacific is the largest ocean, and in i t the Whale-Shark is most widely

and (from the standpoint of how it reached certain places) most aberrantly distributed.

Rhineodon in the Gulf of Siam. In 1925 Dr. Hugh M. Smith, Fisheries Adviser to the Siamese Government,

put on record the capture in 1919 of a specimen on the east side of the Gulf of Siam. Smith did not see the fish, which he knows well, but from the description by eye-witnesses of its size, shape, colour, and dentition he was sure that i t was Rhineodon. It was approximately 60 feet long-the largest on record. A Seychelles specimen measured by Swinburne Ward, Civil Administrator of the islands, was slightly over 45 feet according to E. P. Wright.

Rhineodon in the East Indies. This great shark has been found throughout the Australo-Indian archi-

pelago in rather small numbers and in regions widely separated from each other. Further exploration is likely to locate other specimens in the intermediate regions. It will first be reported from the western island, Java.

Off the North Coast of Java. Rhineodon has twice been recorded from Javanese waters by Van Kampen.

The first (1908) was taken with a harpoon in the Bay of Batavia in 1907. Brought to the fish-market in Batavia, it was dissected by Van Kampen, but he was unable to get a, photograph. Later a second specimen was taken in the strait between Java and the island of Madura. This shark was transported to the city of Surabaya, lifted out of the water, and photographed. Van Kampen secured a copy of this photograph, which he kindly loaned me ; for a reproduction of this, see Gudger, 1933 a.

Off the South-east Coast of Papua. The next and the most distant record of the occurrence of the Whale-Shark

in the East Indian archipelago takes us due east to the southern coast of the long south-eastern extremity of Papua or New Guinea.

While a t anchor (in 1885 2 ) in Red Scar Bay, a short distance west of Port Moresby, Julian Thomas (1887) found his vessel surrounded by a school of great sharks, 25-40 feet long, which came underneath the bow and floated quietly past the stern a t the surface of the water so close that they could have been touched. The largest of these sharks was estimated to be 40 feet long and 6 feet wide. This largest shark was taken for the basking shark (Ceto- rhinus), but Thomas distinctly says that it was an enormous mottled brute with frightful jaws which would have taken in a man whole. Furthermore, bullets fired a t the shark ricochetted from its thick hide as if from armour plate. Now Cetorhinus is not mottled, has a mouth small in relation to its size, has a relatively thin skin, and is not taken in tropical waters This shark must have been a Rhineodon.

Among the Islands of the Celebes Group. There is but one definite reference to the occurrence of the Whale-Shark

This is likewise the earliest scientific record It is in the writings of Max Weber

On September 21 (year not given), in traversing the Strait of Buton, between

in the waters of these islands. for the fish in the Malay Archipelago. (1902) on the work of the Siboga Expedition.

DISTRIBUTION OF THE WHALE-SHARK. 869

the islands of Buton and Muna in the south-eastern part of the Celebes group, with the sea glassy calm, the Siboga was surrounded by a school of sharks and rays of great size. Among them were several Whale-Sharks (number not given), which seemed so fearless of the boat that in playing around the vessel they struck its bow. These facts are also set forth in Webers great volume on the fishes collected by the Siboga Expedition (1913). Frau Weber-Van Bosse (1905) describes in her narrative how one of these Rhineo- dons when fired on dived a t once and did not reappear. Another dived also just as the photographer was on the point of taking a picture.

Off the Coasts of Borneo. There is every reason to believe that Rhineodon is common in the waters

of the Malay Archipelago ; that it breeds there. It is recorded from north- east Borneo. On August 4, 1931, Herre (1932)) on the Philippine revenue cutter Mindoro, while entering Darvel Bay, was told by the chief engineer of two Chacons or Whale-Sharks which frequented those waters. While talking one broke water ) about 200 yards away and swam around unafraid. Herre distinctly saw its spots and ridges. Its length was estimated a t from 12 to 15 metres. A quarter of a mile further, as the boat moved forward another came to the surface. The engineer of the boat told Herre that he had seen these two Chacons almost every time the ship had passed the point during the past fifteen years.

Since the above was written I have had a letter from Mr. Wallace Adams, chief of the division of fisheries in the Philippine Bureau of Science, stating that he was on the Mindoro in Darvel Bay in August 1932 for about two weeks. This mitn told him that he occasionally saw a Chacon, but not necessarily the same one, along these coasts. He stated that the last one noted (estimated a t about 24 feet) had been seen in April 1931 off Labian Point, British North Borneo. This account ties in with Herres report.

Herre has recently put on record (1034) the capture of a 25-foot Whale- Shark at Labuan Island, north-west Borneo. This raises the number of recorded Bornean specimen3 to three.

These accounts are strikingly few for this great archipelago ; other definite ones may be expected. However, it may be stated that Piddington (1835)) presently to be quoted for Rhineodon in Philippine waters, gives a number of hearsay accounts from sailors and fishermen of great spotted sharks a t Ternate, Celebes, and other places in the Malay Archipelago. While these are indefinite and unconfirmed, they are, in the light of the definite records cited, probable and a t least significant.

Before leaving the East Indies i t may be added parenthetically that there is no reference to the presence of the Whale-Shark in Australian waters. I once found a citation to a huge shark (no colour noted) seen in company with a school of whales in the Great Australian Bight. Because of its great size (estimated a t 40 feet) I formerly thought (Gudger, 1918) i t to have been a Rhineodon rather than a Cetorhinus. However, I now know more about Cetorhinus and more about the temperature requirements of both Rhineodon and Ceto- rhinus, and I am satisfied that I was in error.

The Chacon ) in the Philippine Archipelago. North-east of Borneo are the Philippine Islands ; here Rhineodon typus

is more abundant than in any place in the world, and undoubtedly is indigenous. This shark was heard of in these waters as early as 1835, when

He fished and talked with the engineer quoted above.

870 MR. E. W. (JUDGER ON THE GEOGRAPHICAL

H. Piddington published a detailed account of i~ specimen which he saw and of others which he heard of in the Bay of Merivales a t the entrance to Manila Bay in 1816. He published his account under the misleading title Notice of an Extraordinary Fish. While lying at anchor a commotion on deck caused him to go up. He a t first thought the vessel had parted her chain and was drifting over a patch of coral-sand with large black spots. His men called out that it was only the Chacon, and then he saw that i t was im enormous fish passing under the vessel. He thought that it was from 70 to 80 feet long and that its spotted back was 30 feet wide [?I.

His men, many of whom had served in the Spanish gunboat service in those waters, regarded it as an old friend. They told of two which had long lived in the Bay of Merivales. About 1800 one had been driven on shore in a storm and had died. Its odour was so dreadful and lasted so long that it had driven the people from their houses. This present specimen they thought was the other of the pair. Piddington rioted a number of accounts of alleged ferocity of the remaining fish, which are a t variance with all the accounts of the habits of the fish which I have collected from many other regions. One of these accounts was of the alleged experience of an American ships officer about 1820. Piddington knew this man personally. Both men were somewhat reluctant to speak of these observations, fearing disbelief and ridicule.

Piddingtori was told by Chinese arid Malay fishermen of great spotted sharks in the Sulu Sea as large as whales and equally destructive to their nets. He also heard similar stories a t Zebu (Cebu 2 ) . It seems certain that as early as 1816-1835 huge spotted sharks (Rhineodons) were well known in Philippine waters.

Herre (formerly head of the fisheries division in the Philippine Bureau of Science) in 1925 reported that there was in the Museum of San Tomas University a poorly stuffed specimen 16.5 feet long. According to the report of the Philippine curator of the museum i t had been taken by fishermen in Manila Bay in 1840. Adams, present chief of the division of fisheries a t Manila, writes me that i t has disappeared from the museum.

There is no other record of the occurrence of this great shark in tlie Philip- pines until that made by H. M. Smith in 1911. In the issue of September 10, 1910, of tlie Philippine Free Press a photograph with a brief description had been published of a 6-metre specimen caught in a fish-trap near Bacolod, Negros Occidental. Through the kindness of Doctor Herre I have received a copy of this photograph; for a reproduction of i t see Gudger, 1933 a.

The next Philippine record is the most unusual of the Whale-Shark any- where and at any time. In 1915 Jordan stated that he had received from a former student of his a photograph of a Whale-Shark, taken at Zamboanga in 1914, which had in its stomach 7 leggings, 47 buttons, 3 leather belts, and 9 shoes. Now, A. Smith (1849) by dissection found the (Esophagus rather narrow, and at its commencement bends downward toward the parietes of the abdomen, and forms nearly a right angle with the fauces, which gives the fish the power of completely preventing what enters tlie large mouth from being admitted into the stomach unless desirable. Furthermore, the cardiac end of the stomach is very muscular and provided with hard-pointed nipple- like bodies which would make difficult the passage of large solids. Nothing but pelagic organisms-small fish, squids, swimming crabs, alga?, etc.-have ever been found in Whale-Sharks stomachs. Jordans correspondent must have confused two sharks, and have reported from the stomach of the Whale- Shark these articles of human apparel, which probably came from the stomach of some other large mottled shark like Galeocerdo. This latter shark has been

No details were given.

DISTRIBUTION OF THE WHALE-SHARK. 87 1

found by many investigators, the present writer among them, to contain larger and bulkier foreign objects than those listed by Jordan. Perhaps Jordans informant got his information as to these stomach contents by hearsay and his photograph from still another source.

In 1925 Herre published his second paper on Philippine sharks, Rhineodon among others. His description was based on a photograph of a specimen 17.2 feet long taken at Argao, Cebu, September 14, 1914. On the bottom of the printed page before me Herre has noted in his own handwriting that on January 19, 1925, a 30-foot specimen was taken in a fish corral a t Rosario, Manila Bay, Cavite Province. An effort was made by some of the Bureau of Science men to photograph the Rosario fish, but the natives put up such strong opposition that no good negatives could be made. A photograph of the Argao fish was sent me, and has been reproduced in Gudger, 1933 a.

Wallace Adams, present chief of the division of fisheries, Philippine Bureau of Science, writes me that he has twelve good new records of the occurrence of Rhineodon in the islands, and about as many more which need careful investigation. Of these he sent me brief data for ten, with photographs of eight.

Next, one of about 10 metres was taken a t Salinas, Cavite, Luzon, January 19, 1925. A third, estimated a t 23 feet in length, was seen swimming in the Bay of Dapitan, Zamboanga, Mindanao, by H. R. Montalban of the fisheries service. Another, about 19 feet long, was captured a t Libagon, Leyte, on June 7,1929. Another, whose measurements were not ascertained, was killed at Cebu, September 23, 1929. Another was photographed on the beach at San Vincente, February 1,1930. Yet another was captured and photographed at Maasin, Leyte, in May 1931. Two were located and photographed in 1932 : the first (about 22 feet over all) was stranded in a fish corral a t Novotas, Luzon, January 7 ; the other (only 17.5 feet long) a t Barrio Aplaya, Batagas, Luzon, on March 4. Last of all, another was reported to Florencio Talavera, of the division of fisheries, by fishermen of Silay, Occidental Province, as stranded there ; no date is given, but the shark was said to be 36 feet long.

Of these ten reported specimens Mr. Adams has sent me photographs of eight. These form a valuable addition to the American Museum collection of photographs of the Whale-Shark, and when added to the others now in the museums collection (some noted already, others to be referred to later) they make this probably the largest collection of whale-shark photographs in the world.

Adding to this abundant data, Adams writes (October 29, 1932) that : On my last trip south I obtained other records, and was told that young specimens occasionally appear in the markets of Cebu, Iloilo, Zamboanga, Siasi, and Jolo, where they are sold as food to the natives. Unfortunately 1 have no verification of this from anyone who would be in a position absolutely to identify the species.

Such unconfirmed reports have no scientific standing, as Adams indicates. However, they fit into the picture as probable confirmatory evidence along with that next to follow.

Mr. William Stiernagle was in the Coast and Geodetic Survey work of the Philippine Government, in command of the Rhomblon from March 25, 1912, till January 31, 1915. In this work he was constantly on the move, and his opportunities for getting acquainted with the Whale-Shark were many. Some years ago he called a t my office and told me that he had often seen the fish, and that he had once fallen in with a school of them. He then gave me some small photographs showing large dorsal fins projecting above the surface

First is the fish from Argao, Cebu, in 1914.


of the sea; this he said showed one of these schools. Since then I have mislaid the notes I made and have been unable to reach Mr. Stiernagle by letter. These fins might be easily taken for those of blackfish (a small species of whale), but information from his superiors a t Manila is that he knew well the difference between blackfish and whale-sharks, and that he was in a position to bear credible testimony concerning the occurrence of Rhineodon in the Philippines.

Along the same line Adams writes that Mr. A. D. Lee, of the Philippine Packing Corporation, saw a Whale-Shark in February 1931, just west of Initao in Iligan Bay, Mindanao. In the matter of schools of this great fish Adams reports from Mr. Lee in the following terms :- On June 1, 1932, while in Dapitan Bay, just south-west of Tagolo Point, northern Zamboanga, Mindanao, he ran into a school of fifteen or more of the great monsters from 20 to 50 or more feet in length. He states that he found himself literally surrounded by them, and was of the opinion that there may have been many more. He actually counted fifteen in sight, and was so busy from that time on in handling the boat and getting away that he did not look to see if there were many more. The boat he was on was of fifty-foot length, and some of the sharks seen were of this length or longer. This same thing occurred on three different occasions, so that he and his companions came to the conclusion that these sharks may have been feeding in this particular locality or possibly stayed there all the time. His fear was that one of these fishes might come up under the boat and capsize it. I might state that Mr. Lee knows the difference between porpoises, blackfish, and whales, having cruised and fished over great areas. I was with him on one cruise during which we saw all three of the above mentioned, but none of the Whale-Sharks.

In this section we have positive evidence of the abundance of the Whale- Shark in the Philippines. In fact, there are more photographs of specimens of Rhineodon from the Philippines than from almost all the other seas taken together. Then t,here is evidence, the credibility of which is highly attested, from two observers neither of whom knew anything of what the other had seen, that this great fish is so abundant in the shelt,ered waters of this archipelago that it forms schools. All this great mass of testimony, accumulating for nearly 100 years, gives ground for saying that Rhineodon is indigenous in the Philippines.

Adams plans to bring together into an inclusive article all the data on the occurrence of the Whale-Shark in the Philippines since 1835. This, illustrated by the photographs taken of the very large number of specimens, will be an invaluable addition to the literature of Rhineodon typus.

Rhineodon among the Bonin Islands.

Much of this evidence is photographic.

North-east of the Philippines, in north latitude 27 and east longitude 140, are the Bonin Islands, also called the Coffin or Bailey Group. According to J. Cumming Dewar (1892) the yacht Nyanza, on July 22, 1889, was swinging a t anchor off Hillsborough Island, the largest of the group, when a gigantic shark came alongside. This specimen was 25 or 30 feet long and a t least 8 feet broad across the shoulders. This great size plus the locality led me to suppose it to be a Whale-Shark, and this was made sure when I read further that The color was of a bluish-gray, dotted with large white spots. Efforts were made to harpoon it, and many rifle-shots were fired, but they were all ineffectual, and after an hour the fish swam away.

Rhineodon off Japan. North of the Bonins lies the island kingdom of Japan, and in the light

of certain data to be presented later one cannot be surprised to learn that

DISTRIBUTION OF THE WHALE-SHAR,K. 87 3

Date.

1919 . . 18994. . 1907 . . - 18854. . 1931 . . 1934 . . 1816 . . 1840 . . 1910 . . 1914 . . 1914 . . 1925 . . - - 1925 . . 1929 . . 1929 . . 1930 . . 1931 . . 1932 . . 1932 . . 1892 . . 1901 ..

---

the Whale-Shark has been taken in those parts. There are, however, but two published accounts (both of the same fish). Kishinouye (1901) records the capture of a 33-foot specimen in a drift-net off Cape Inubo in June 1901. The skin of this was mounted, and was long on exhibit a t an amusement park near Tokyo. Kishinouye thought i t a new species, and named it R. pentalineatus, but there is no good reason that I can find in his description for making this a new species. This same account was published in Japanese in Dobutsu Zashi in 1903. For a figure of this fish see Gudger, 1931.

In this second publication the Whale-Shark is given the native name Yasurizame. Thinking that this trivial name might indicate that the fish was common I wrote Professor Kishinouye about the matter, He kindly answered as follows :- I am told that Rhineodon is quite numerous in the fishing-grounds of striped bonito off the eastern coast of Hondo. In the summer months, when the bonito fishing is busily carried on, the large shark comes to the surface of the sea, and seems to remain there basking. Around these sharks the bonito crowd together. Fisherman do not catch these sharks, as they are not valued much. They are known under the name of Zinbei-zame .

This association between the Whale-Sharks and the bonitos on the Japanese fishing-grounds recalls that of the Chagrins and the Caranxes a t the Sey- chelles. Another like case will be quoted later. It seems not improbable that these bony fishes (all of one group) seek the great shark, to hide in it8 shadow. This habit of seeking the shadow of a boat or a huge fish is practised by many kinds of fishes.

The distribution of the Whale-Shark in the Western Pacific Ocean is shown in graphic form in Table 11.

It seems to me to be R. typus.

This means file-shark, in allusion to the teeth.

Locality.

GulfofSiam. Buton Strait, Celebes. Bay of Batavia. Strait of Madeira. Red Scar Bay, Papua. Darvel Bay, Borneo. Labuan, Borneo. Manila Bay, Philippines. Manila, Bay, Philippines. Bacolod, Philippines. Zamboango, Philippines. Argao, Cebu, Philippines, Manila Bay, Philippines. Dapitan, Philippines. Silay, Philippines. Salinas, Philippines. Libagon, Philippines. Cebu, Philippines. San Vincente, Philippines. Maasin, Philippines. Novotas, Philippines. Barrio, Philippines. Bonin Islands. Japan.

Total in Western I Pacific Ocean. J

TABLE 11.-Distribution of Rhineodon typus in the Western Pacific Ocean. - V O . 1 2+ 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

I

If

6+

--

-

Reporter.

H. M. Smith (1925). Weber (1902, 1903),Weber-Van Bosse (1905) Van Kampen (1908). Van Kampen (personal communication). Thomas (1887). Herre (1932). Herre (1934). Piddington (1835). Herre (1925). H. M. Smith (1911). Jordan (1915). Herre (1925). Herre (personal communication). W. Adams (personal communication). W. Adams (personal communication). W. Adams (personal communication). W. Adams (personal communication). W. Adams (personal communication). W. Adams (personal communication). W. Adams (personal communication). W. Adams (personal communication). W. Adams (personal communication). Dewar (1892). Kishinouye (1901, 1903).


Returning to the Philippines, the reader and the author will now travel eastward across the broadest part of the Pacific toward the west coast of America. However, in longitude 135" W. we shall have to detour some 24" to the south to note the most isolated occurrence of Rhineodon ever recorded. There seems to be no reason why this pelagic shark, inhabiting tropical and subtropical waters, should not be found all over the South Seas. However, there is but one record-that now to be listed.

RHINEODON IN THE CENTRAL PACIFIC. Some ichthyologists have the habit (a very reprehensible one in my judgment)

of listing in the fauna of a particular region fishes which have never been taken there but which they think will sooner or later be found there. Thus Gunther has done for Rhineodon in the concluding section (Heft ix.) of his work on "Andrew Garrett's Fische deer Siidsee " (' Journal Museum Godeffroy,' 1910, Heft xvii. pp. 486-487). Fortunately, as we shall now see, his conjecture has been turned into a reality.

Rhineodon in the Taumotu Islands. I n May 1929 I learned that there was a Rhineodon skin in the little museum

at Papeete, Tahiti. Tremendously interested I wrote Abbe Rougier for information as to its source, and I also urged him to prepare or publication a note on its occurrence, giving full data. He courteously answered that he had the skin, which had been sent him by M. P. Herv6, Administrator of the Taumotu Archipelago, and that as soon as he could get the necessary data he would prepare such a note.

This Rougier did (1929)) and from his note I extract the following data. I n May 1928 divers a t work a t Takaroa, Taumotu Archipelago, were unex- pectedly confronted by a great spotted shark. They captured the fish, which proved to be a young Whale-Shark only 17.3 feet long, whose weight was estimated at 2000 pounds. Its skin, as noted above, was sent to Rougier a t Papeete. There can be no doubt about the identification of this shark, since before the publication of Rougier's article he had received the paper which Gudger and Hoffmann (1928) had published on the capture of this fish at Havana in that year. This article contained four figures of the shark. From these figures the skin in his possession could surely be identified.

RIi lNEODON ON THE WEST COAST OF THE AMERICAS. The greatest length of coast in anything approaching a straight line is the

Pacific coast of the two Americas, and the north-south distribution of the Whale-Shark on this coast is from Guaymas, Mexico, to Callao, Peru-from 28" N. lat. to 12" 30' S. 1at.-a total of 40" 30'. I ts occurrence in various localities over this great range will now be considered, beginning a t the north.

Rhineodon in the Gulf of California. Due to the north-east-flowing Kuro Sivo the Whale-Shark finds a com-

fortable temperature as far north as Cape Inubo on the coast of Japan, latitude 36" N. In the corresponding coast of western North America there is a southward-ffowing cool current which the Whale-Shark cannot endure. Its farthest north on this coast is in the Gulf of California off Guaymas, Mexico, in lat. 28" N.

The earliest account of our great shark in these waters is from the pen of


Theodore Gill (1865). In 1858 the Smithsonian Institution had received from a Captain Stone the jaws and vertebrz of a huge shark taken at some undesignated locality in the Gulf of California. Gill of course knew of Andrew Smiths discovery and descriptions of the Whale-Shark (1829 and 1849), but, misled by Smiths description and by Muller and Henles defective figure of the teeth o f Rhineodon in their Systematische Beschreibung der Plagiostonien (1841), he made a new genus and species based on these teeth-Micristodus punctatus, the spotted shark with the minute teeth. However, the teeth of his specimen are identical with those of the Florida 1923 specimen, presently to be referred to, as I know by careful comparison. Hence his name falls into synonymy.

As noted Gills fish came from an undesignated locality in the Gulf of California ; not so, however, those now to be considered.

Guaymas City, on the west coast of Mexico, is situated about halfway between the mouth of the Gulf of California and its head. In Gudgers article (1927 c ) will be found the record of how Mr. A. P. Murillo sent in a description of two personal experiences with the Whale-Shark and a hearsay account of a third fish which there was no reason to doubt. Mr. Murillo accompanied his letters with sketches and with photographs which definitely assign this great fish to this region.

Cape San Lucas is situated (about 23 N. lat. and 110 W. long.) farther south than Guaymas. Here the Whale-Shark is so abundant as to lead to the belief that, however i t reached these parts, it is possibly native there now. The records (two published, three unpublished) are set out in some detail in Gudger (1927~). Herein they will be briefly cited. First is the account by Zane Grey (1925~) of his efforts to catch at Cape San Lucas a Whale-Shark about 50 feet long. The narrative of this herculean task is told in greater detail in his book Fishing Virgin Seas (1925 b ) . The endeavour culminated when the fish dived and carried away shark-hook and line. Mr. Grey notes that three other Whale-Sharks were seen in this locality while on this expedition. Further- more, Japanese fishermen told him of two specimens that had been caught in their nets and caused great destruction. Other fishermen are quoted to the effect that Whale-Sharks had been seen every season in the lower part of the Gulf, and that on the west coast of the peninsula they were numerous around Santa Margarita Island and in Magdalena Bay. The fish is so large and so distinctively coloured that it is easily recognized, and hence there is no reason to doubt these - reports.

In April 1926 the yacht Pawnee, of the Harrv Pame Bingham Oceano- graphic -Expedition, was in the Gulf of California. On boarvd her, in the position of ichthyologist, was Mr. Louis Mowbray, then of the New York Aquarium, and a t present Director of the Bermuda Aquarium. He had been especially asked to look out for Rhineodon around Cape San Lucas, and this he did to good purpose : he saw three live fish and one dead one. The latter looked as though it had been rammed by a vessel-which fate elsewhere overtook three others presently to be noted. Farther up the Gulf, but still in its lower part, Mowbray saw several others; these fish have been put on record by Gudger (1927 c).

I n June-July of that same year Mr. Keith Spalding, of Pasadena, California, a fellow and patron of the American Museum, went on an extensive fishing trip to the Cape San Lucas region. Mr. Spalding wrote me that he saw a 25-foot Whale-Shark in the. passage between Ceralbo Island and the mainland of the peninsula. His launch ran alongside it for several hundred yards a t a distance of 15 or 20 feet. It submerged, swam under the boat, as though

876 MR.. E. W. GUDOER ON THE GEOGRAPHICAL

looking us over, and then disappeared. What we saw was exactly what is shown in the pictures in Zane Greys book Fishing Virgin Seas . Another Rhineodon was seen by Mr. Spaldings party, and it was reported to them that this shark is not uncommon. Record of these occurrcnces was made by the present writer (1927 c ) .

In that same summer (1926) Mr. Mack Sennett, the motion picture producer, organized a fishing expedition to this same region, provided not merely with hooks and lines but also with a newly invented camera to take underwater pictures of fishes in motion. That fall I saw the film thus taken, and to my astonishment part of it showed a swimming Rhineodon. I a t once wrote Mr. Sennett, and with great generosity he presented the museum with a copy of the section of the film showing the Whale-Shark-in some ways the most unique gift it ever received.

Mr. Sennett wrote me that this specimen was encountered in Los Frales Bay, about 40 miles inside the Gulf, where they were fishing for tuna. He found great numbers of tuna swimming about the great shark (estimated a t 65 feet long and 10 in beam measurement), while some twenty were in close attendance on it when the boat came up. This tallies with what Kishinouye wrote me about bonito attending the Whale-Shark off the coast of Japan and with Duponts account of Caranx associating with the Chagrin ) in the Seychelles. Record was made of Mr. Sennetts specimen by the present writer in his 1927 c article.

These accounts all plainly indicate that the Whale-Shark is far from uncommon around Cape San Lucas and in the lower half of the Gulf of California. Indeed , i t seems almost as abundant here as in the Philippine Islands. Possibly, however, the same fish were seen several times around Cape San Lucas, thus increasing the count. I n any case i t should be noted that most of these fish were seen in two summers by fishing expeditions which were making intensive search for large fishes. But for these there would be no records for Cape San Lucas. On the contrary, the Philippine accounts are mainly of stranded or captured fish recorded over a time-space of about 100 years.

Rhineodon at Acapulco, Southern Coast of Mexico. Five specimens of the Whale-Shark have been taken at Acapulco, far south

on the Pacific coast of Mexico-one in 1932 and four in 1933. I have photographs of all five. Judging by the photographs (two of which are reproduced by the courtesy of Ralph L. Smith as P1. I.) all were immature specimens. From this one must judge that this great fish breeds in these waters. Faunal record of t,his new locality will be made by Gudger and Smith in 1934.

The only one measured was about 19 feet over all.

The Tirctoreva in Panama Bay. In 1884 Chierchia, commander of the Italian corvette Vettor Pisani

(which was making a voyage round the world), reported in Nature the capture of a 29-foot Whale-Shark off Taboga Island, Panama Bay. This was one of several great sharks [visible] some miles from our anchorage. This huge fish, called Tintoreva ) by the islanders, was known zo them, since they had seen at least one before, a smaller specimen.

This account (as sent in to Nature ) was submitted to A. C. L. Giinther, Keeper of Fishes in the British Museum (Natuml History), who comments (1884) interestingly on this capture and on the fish in general. However, he adds nothing new, and his note need not detain us further.

DISTRIBUTION OF THE WHALE-SHARE. 877

This report by Chierchia is also found in the book (1885) in which he published an account of the natural history investigations made during the voyage, which extended from 1882 to 1885. The only copy in America known to me is in the United States National Museum.

Rhineodon in $he Galapagos Islands. Going still farther south our next Whale-Shark locality is in the Galapagos

Islands, made famous by Charles Darwin in Voyage of the ( Beagle. A later explorer in these islands, William Beebe (1926), writes thus of what was seen on June 9, 1925, on the north side of Narborough Island :- What we suppose must have been a Whale-Shark rose alongside the ship about noon, floated there for a few minutes, and then sank.

Apparently Beebe did not see the fish himself, but Dr. W. K. Gregory and Mr. John Tee-Van saw it distinctly under the ships counter. I have talked with both of them, and since each saw the spotted body it was clear that this was Rhineodon, and not Cetmhinus, which latter shark is, however, found all along the western coast of South America, and even in the vicinity of the Galapagos Archipelago. These data I collected and published (Gudger , 1927 b ) , thus establishing a new faunal record for Rhineodon.

Another specimen was taken a t Albemarle Island by Mr. Vincent Astors expedition in March 1933. It measured 23 feet, and its weight was estimated a t 3 tons, since to get it aboard the yacht it was necessary to use the two davits by which the three-ton launch was hoisted to the deck. Record was made of this capture by Mowbray (1933) and by Gudger (1933).

It must have been 40 feet long.

Rhineodon off Callao, Peru. Giinther (1884, p. 365) states that Professor William Nation examined

Nation (about whom I can find little) a specimen taken off Callao in 1878.

TABLE 111.-Distribution of Rhineodon typus in the Central and Eastern Pacific Ocean.

Date.

1928 . 1858 . 19271. 1924 . 1926 . 1926 . 1926 . 1933 . 1884 . 1925 . 1878 .

Locality.

Takaroa, Taumotus. Gulf of California. Gulf of California, Guaymas. Gulf of California, Cape San Lucas. Gulf of California, Cape San Lucas. Gulf of California, Cape San Lucas. Gulf of California, Cape Sail Lucas. Acapulco, Mexico. Panama Bay.

Galapagos Islands.

Callao, Peru.

Total in Central and Eastern 7 Pacific Ocean. I

No.

- 1 1 2+ 4 + 4+ 2 1 5 1+

2

1

!4+

--

-

Reporter.

Rougier (1929). Gill (1865). Gudger (1927 c). Grey (1925 a, b). Gudger (1927 c ) from Mowbray. Gudger (1927 c ) from Spalding. Gudger (1927 c) from Sennett. Gudger and Smith (1935). Chierchia (1884, 1885), Gunther

( 1 884). Beebe (1926), Gudger (1927 b, 1933),

Nation (1878), Giinther (1884). Mowbray (1933).

lived long in Peru-at least he was writing on Peruvian birds as early as 1866 and as late as 1885 ; but he seems never to have written up this specimen of the Whale-Shark for publication in Europe. However, he sent the British

?ROO. ZOOL. SOc.-1934. 57

878 MI1. E. W. GUDGER ON THE GEOGRAPHICAL

Museum a section of its dental plate, and the teeth of this, after comparison with similar ones from the Seychelles sent in by Wright, were declared by Gunther to be identical. Furthermore Giinther, in listing the Whale-Shark among the (yet-to-be-discovered) fishes of the South Seas, stated in a footnote that Nation contributed an account of this great fish to the issue of January 24, 1878, of the South Pacific Times, published at Callao. I have been unable to verify this reference, since, so far as I have been able to ascertain, there is no file of that journal in the United States. For this citation to Giinther see section of this article Rhineodon in the Central Pacific (page 874).

The distribution of the Whale-Shark in the Central and Pacific Ocean is found in abbreviated form in Table 111.

RHINEODO-V IN THE ATLANTIC OCEAN AND IN CERTAIN OF ITS SUBDIVISIONS.

Let us now return to the place of first discovery of the Whale-Shark-in 1828 in TABLE BAY, Cape of Good Hope, South Africa. In order to properly and effectively begin this paper this locality has been treated as an independent one. However, I thought that Table Bay belonged to the Indian Ocean until I consulted an atlas and found it on the Atlantic side. In Table IV. it heads the list of Atlantic localities.

Rhineodon typus at the Cape of Good Hope. The first capture for this locality is that of a 15-foot specimen in Table

Bay in April 1828, recorded by A. Smith (1829). The second is of a 20-foot fish taken in April 1934, on the west side of the Cape Peninsula and recorded by Barnard (1934). Both the occurrences, the small sizes, and the dates are of interest in the light of the explanation of the distribution of the shark to be given later. It is significant that these captures (106 years apart) are the earliest and latest records of this great fish in the waters of our earth.

Rhineodon in the Gulf of Guinea. On the Ivory Coast of this gulf, some 60 or 70 miles south of the mouth

of the Sassandra River, about ~ . ~ O A . M . on July 6,1924, the bow of the motor- vessel Alba struck a Whale-Shark almost amidships. So evenly balanced was the shark on the bow of the vessel that it resisted all efforts to dislodge it and to hoist it on deck. Finally the vessel stopped, the dead fish was cleared from the bow, and speed was resumed. The captain of the vessel wrote me that the fish was 25-30 feet long and covered with white spots. This would have suggested our fish, but when he had sent photographs showing the fish hanging on the vessels stem there was no longer any doubt. The complete record of this occurrence may be found in Gudger, 1927 a.

Rhineodon off the Abrolhos Light, Brazil. Off the south-east coast of Brazil, near the Abrolhos Light, in 17 57 S. lat.

and 38 41 W. long., a Whale-Shark attempted to cross the path of the steamer American Legion on May 19, 1922. As in the case of the like capture in the Gulf of Guinea in 1924, the stern of the vessel struck the fish almost squarely amidships and broke its back. So well balanced was the fish that it hung on the bow, and was carried along until the steamer was finally stopped and backed to let it sink. I published a faunal record of this in 1922, and described the incidents of its capture in an article published the following year (Gudger, 1923 a) .


Rhineodon in the Caribbean Xea. Prom what has been learned of its occurrence in warm seas the Whale-Shark

might be expected to be found in Caribbean waters, but attested evidence is thus far lacking. In March 1926 some unknown person kindly sent me clippings from the Trinidad [B. W. I.] Guardian headed r Whale-Sharks off Monos (in the Gulf of Paria). The account states that as many as nine of these sharks were seen, that they fearlessly allowed the boats to approach them, and that they were 25-30 feet long. There is no statement as to colour, position of mouth, and kind of teeth-points that would have surely settled the question as to identity. However, one of the clippings states that they were identified as Whale-Sharks from Harmsworths Natural History, and gives the scientific name as Rhinodon typicus and a correct statement as to their chief structural peculiarities. This would seem to be fair evidence as to the correctness of the identification. Furthermore, the other large shark, Ceto- rhinus, with which Rhineodon is often confused, is not found in these waters.

I wrote to several persons who were named as members of the parties which were out in the boats and saw these great fish, but no answers came back. Personally I have little doubt that these reputed Whale-Sharks were actually such.

Prior to this Van Campen Heilner, the well-known angler and author of books on angling, had written me from Europe in July 1924 : I recently met a man in England who knows of a reef in the Caribbean Sea where the Whale-Sharks are as thick as porpoises. He broached the subject himself, and did not know that I even knew that there was such an animal.

Still later a visitor, long a resident in Porto Rico, told me of a report common in San Juan that in 1889 or 1890 a Whale-Shark had followed a schooner across the strait from Cuba to Porto Rico. It would not follow the boat into San Juan Harbour, but was seen for several years about the mouth of the harbour. It is said to have died, to have come ashore on the beach, and to have measured about 20 metres in length. My informant, Mr. 0. W. Barrett, formerly director of the insular department of agriculture and labour, knew in San Juan a t least one man who declared that he had seen the fish. Mr. Barrett told of another Whale-Shark that had been reported to him from the neigh- bourhood. Mr. Barrett has had long experience in shark-fishing in these waters, and is persuaded that these accounts of the Whale-Shark are credible, even though he did not personally see the fish.

These cumulative accounts, and others to follow for adjacent regions, certainly point to the fact that this great shark is found in Caribbean waters, and one may confidently await the time when scientific records will be made; but a t the present time one must record these accounts as credible, but based on hearsay evidence.

The Giant Xhark in Yucatan Waters. For this region also the evidence is from sources other than scientific,

but as there is a good deal of it, and that cumulative, it also has weight. The one bit of published evidence is from the pen of Frederick W. Wallace (1923). In writing of the red snapper fishery on the Campeachy Bank, just north of the peninsula of Yucatan, he says that the fishermen told him of a gigantic Whale- Shark which they knew so well that they had nicknamed it Big Ben. Then he adds that Fishermen becalmed off Contoi Island in the Yucatan Channel have seen them basking around them in great numbers.

Mr. Arthur D. P. Williamson, long a resident a t Belize, British Honduras, in answer to my enquiries, wrote in 1927 about a celebrated great spotted shark called Sapodilla Tom, because it was reputed to have been seen around the

57*


Sapodilla cays. He could get little information, for although several men had heard of .this shark only one had seen it. However, as he questioned the men separately i t may be well to make note of their statements. Of course, there is nothing here to assure us that these men were referring to the Whale-Shark. Any fairly well-known shark of great size might be designated by the nick- name above. However, Dr. H. M. Smith, former U.S. Commissioner of U.S. Fisheries, writes me that for many years accounts have been coming in to him by letter of huge spotted sharks found in Yucatan waters, and in adjacent parts of the Gulf of Mexico. These he feels quite sure are Rhineodons. So believes Mr. L. L. Mowbray, of the Bermuda Aquarium, from verbal accounts given him over many years by red snapper fishermen out of Gulf ports in our southern states.

Here again the evidence is more or less hearsay, but i t is cumulative, and cannot be summarilydisposed of. Of course more authentic records are wanted, such as those next to be set out-records which would prove that the Whale- Shark is found in the Gulf waters around Yucatan.

Rhineodon off Havana Harbour. Although the Whale-Shark has but recently been taken off Havana, these

captures will be considered ahead of those made in Florida waters. On November 20, 1927, a 32-foot specimen was taken at Jaimanitas, a fishing village about 5 miles west of the mouth of Havana Harbour. Dr. W. H. Hoffmann, of the Laboratorio Finlay, Havana, obtained three excellent photographs, and in June 1928 he and I put this specimen on record-the first, so far as known, for Cuban waters. For details see Gudger and Hoffmann, 1928.

Two-and-a-quarter years later (March 10, 1930) a %-foot Whale-Shark was captured off Cojimar, a village about 5 miles east of Havana. Either this Whale-Shark or another had been seen off Cojimar for three years, and was well known as El Elephante. A faunal record was shortly made of thig fish (Gudger and Hoffmann, 1930). I n 1931 we published a popular article, using our illustrations of the first fish and an unusual one of the second specimen.

Rhineodon on the Coasts of Florida. As many specimens of Rhineodon have been taken on the coasts of Florida

as in all the other parts of the Atlantic taken together-five for Florida, two for Havana, one off the coast of Brazil, one in the Gulf of Guinea, and one in Table Bay, South Africa. Indeed, it is hardly exact to count the two Havana fish a art from the Florida specimens ; all really belong to the Straits of Florida.

The first of these, a young specimen only 18 feet long, came ashore a t Ormond Beach, January 25, 1902, and was recorded by B. A. Bean (1902). The skin and tooth-bands are preserved in the United States National Museum, where I have had the opportunity to examine them. As a result of the interest aroused by this specimen-the first record for the Atlantic (except, of course, the Table Bay fish) and the very first for the United States-Gill wrote two historical papers (1902 and 1905) in which he brought together much of the literature of the Whale-Shark. I n the same year as Gills last paper (1905) Bean also published an excellent historical article in which he reproduced a large number of the published figures of Rhineodon and of its teeth. To these three articles I must acknowledge my indebtedness, since they gave me a sure basis for many years study of Rhineodon.

The second Florida specimen was captured at Knights Key late in May

The f! ve Florida fish will now be located and listed.

DISTRIBUTION OF THE WHALE-SHARK, 881

1912. I was a t the Tortugas (Florida) Laboratory of the Carnegie Institution of Washington a t the time of capture, and late in JuIy, on my way north, I saw the skin of this huge fish (38 feet long) hanging over a pole under a shed a t Miami. Later it was mounted (very incorrectly as was found out years later). The next year is was transferred to a flat-boat, and was exhibited all up and down the Atlantic coast. Later still it was transported by rail to many cities in the eastern half of the United States. Last of all i t was taken back to Miami, where I saw i t in 191Athe most prodigious fish I ever beheld.

Three papers were published in 1913 putting this capture on record- Gudger (August 22) , H. M. Smith (August 29), and Townsend (November). Townsend illustrated his article with two figures, one showing the enormous mouth with a man crouching in it, and the other a broadside view of the mounted fish. In 1915 Gudger published an extensive paper, quoting a long letter from the captor of this fish describing the capture and the fish. Included in the article was a considerable number of photographs of the fish in the water. and one of the mounted specimen. To this was added all the data for the natural history of the shark found in all the articles then known to me dealing with the fish. However, since in such an historical paper one almost never gets all the references, i t was necessary to publish a second paper of the kind in 1918.

On June 11, 1919, a third Florida Rhineodon was taken-this time off the south-western point of the peninsula-in the Bay of Florida near Cape Sable. From the captors I obtained photographs of this 31-foot specimen. A member of the American Museum tried to procure the skin for the museum, but since a prohibitive price was asked the negotiations fell through. An interesting account of its capture was written by W. W. Bradley (American Angler for August 1919). Later a faunal record of this specimen was made by the writer (Gudger, 1920).

On June 9, 1923, another Rhineodon was discovered and captured in the Florida Keys near Marathon. This fish was 31.5 feet long-but 5 inches longer than the preceding. This shark was put on record in 1923 by both Mowbray and Gudger. Mr. Mowbray, then of the New York Aquarium, reached Miami on the day following the capture of this specimen, and a t once went to Long Key, where the fish had been tied up. The story of Mowbrays herculean efforts to tow the great fish to Key West and to get it out on the marine railway in order to get its skin have been set out in detail by Gudger and Mowbray (1930). Their article is illustrated by a large number of photographs of the fish in the water.

As this article narrates, Mowbrays best efforts were in vain-unavoidable delays and an unprecedented rise in the temperature of the water ruined the skin. However, from Mowbrays measurements, and from pictures, moving and still, backed by figures of all the mounted specimens and by all the then known photographs of the fish, Mr. James L. Clark, chief of our department of preparation in the American Museum, has supervised the construction of a model, one-fifth the natural size, for our Hall of Fishes. The fish and this model have been described by the present writer (Gudger, 1931). The illustrations include figures of this model and of all other models and mounted skins extant.

Out of the wreckage a t Key West Mowbray by great efforts salvaged a large number of hard parts. These have been worked up by Dr. E. Grace White, whose studies have given valuable and badly needed insight into the relationships of Rhineodon. Her paper was published by the museum in 1930.

After an apparent absence from the coast of Florida of nine years another specimen (the fifth) was taken near Miami on January 18, 1932. As chronicler

All the figures known at that time were reproduced.

882 ME. E. w. GUDGER ON THE GEOGRAPHICAL

of such captures I duly put this fish on record also. The fish was small- about 18 feet long. However, its relatively small size, and its capture near the city of Miami, to which it was towed, made possible a magnificent photograph, one of the best ever made of the Whale-Shark, as the interested reader may see by consulting the writers article (1933a), reproducing all photographs available at that time showing the Whale-Shark in the flesh.

For some time newspaper accounts have been sent in to me purporting to relate encounters with the Whale-Shark in the Gulf Stream between Miami, Florida, and the Bahamas. Efforts have been made to get definite facts about these reputed occurrences, but so far in vain. There is no reason why the shark should not be found there. Similar reports have come in from among the Florida Keys, and Dr. Hoffmann has heard like stories of the occurrence of great spotted sharks along the Havana coast of Cuba. There is nothing inherently improbable in these reports. It is plain that somewhere in the Caribbean and Gulf there is a reservoir of these sharks, probably a breeding ground, from which they drift to the north-east with the Gulf Stream. The seven definite records for the Havana-Florida region are an argument for this conclusion that must be accepted. The Whale-Shark is certainly a permanent resident of the Gulf-Caribbean waters.

In Table IV. is found a recapitulation of the facts as to the distribution of Rhineodon in the Atlantic and some of its subdivisions.

TABLE 1V.-Distribution of Rhineodon typus in the Atlantic Ocean.

Date.

1828 . . 1934 . . 1902 .. 1912 .. 1919 .. 1922 . . 1923 . . 1924 . , 1927 .. 1930 . . 1932 . .

Place.

Table Bay, South Africa. Commetje Bay, S. AfriL*a. Ormond Beach, Florida. Knights Key, Florida.

Bay of Florida. Abrolhos Light, Brazil. Marathon, Florida Keys.

Gulf of Guinea. Near Havana, Cuba. Near Havana, Cuba. Miami, Florida.

Total in Atlantic Ocean.

No.

1 1 1 1

1 1 1

1 1 l + 1 +

1+

-

-

Reporter.

Andrew Smith (1829). Barnard (1934). Bean (1902). Gudger (1913, 1915), H. M. Smith (191:

Townsend (1913). Gudger (1920). Gudger (1922, 1923 a). Gudger (1923 b, 1931), Gudger 6: Mowbr,

Gudger (1927). Gudgor 6: Hoffmann (1928, 1931). Gudger 6: Hoffmann (1930, 1931). Gudger (1932).

(1930), Rlowbray (1923).

TOTAL NUMBER OF SPECIMENS OF RHI~YRODON REPORTED. During the years in which I have been writing on the Whale-Shark I have

many times been asked How many specimens have been reported? My answer has been an offhand guess of Between fifty and sixty. Here are the exact facts brought out in this study :

Total Rhineodoris reported, 76+.

Eleven good reports are credited to the Atlantic ; 15 to the Indian ; 26 to the Western Pacific, and 24 to the Central and Eastern Pacific ; 76 in all. The plus sign means that various specimens have been seen but not captured or counted, or that reports have come in of the presence of this great shark about which there can be little doubt, but of which there is no proof that would permit them to be counted here. The number of these cannot even be estimated

ALlantic, 11+. Indian, l a + . Pacific: Western, 26+ ; Central & Eastern, 24f .


Not the least interesting thing to be said, in conclusion, is that there have been found, after a diligent combing of the literature, only 74 definite records, acceptable in the face of scientific scrutiny, of the largest and most markedly coloured shark that swims the seas. In size the captured specimens vary in measured length from 14 to 45 feet. However, H. M. Smith has stated the size of one, which he did not see, but for which he had very definite data, as approximately 60 feet. As for the statement concerning the coloration, let the reader study fig. 1 and fig. 2 (Pl. I.) made from photographs of the fish in question. One would think that its great size and very peculiar coloration, together with its habit of swimming a t the surface in coastal waters where ship traffic is thickest, would lead to a small flood of reports of its occurrence. But a diligent combing of the literature from 1828 to 1934 has brought tc light but 76 accounts.

THE SCIENTIFIC NAME OF THE WHALE-SHARK. It may be well, in an inclusive paper like this, to interpolate just here

a brief discussion of the varied spellings of both the generic and specific names of the Whale-Shark. As has been noticed, various names have been used by the authors quoted in this paper to designate this great shark.

The discoverer, A. Smith, in 1829 gave the Whale-Shark the name Rhinco- don typus, but in 1849 he changed it to Rhinodon typicus. This latter is the name written on the original drawing (made about 1848) of the Table Bay specimen in Smiths own handwriting, according to Gunther, who had the drawing in his possession. The story of this change may be of interest ; it will be set out briefly, omitting bibliographical details.

In 1831 Bonaparte followed Smith in using Rhincodon. In 1838-39 Swainson published the names Rineodon, Rhineodon, and Rhiniodon. Muller and Henle, in 1838, used Rhineodon, but in 1841, in their great systematic work previously referred to, gave our shark the name Rhinodm typicus. This is the name, i t will be noted, which is generally given to i t by the authors quoted herein. No reason for Smiths change of name can be found save the presumed desire to follow the great systematists Muller and Henle.

Our most accurate American systematist was Theodore Gill, who a t first (1902) used the name Rhinodon typicus, but noted that Rhineodon was the first generic name. In 1905 he used the name Rhineodun t y p w , which is correct according to the rules of priority in nomenclature. But why not Rhinwdon, as Smith published i t in 1829 ? Smith undoubtedly wrote Rhineodon typus, but the printer in England mistook Smiths e for a c, and so printed it. In the light of the derivation (rhine, file ; odous or odont, tooth) it would be absurd to let the typographical error stand,. and hence I have always used the name as Smith must have written it in his manuscript in 1828.

GENERA AND SPECIES IN THE FAMILY RHINEODONTID~:. Following this discussion of the scientific name of the Whale-Shark, and

before summarizing its distribution and discussing its centre of origin and manner of dispersal, i t will be well briefly to consider the question of whether or not there are more genera and species than one in the family Rhineodontids. It will be noted that all the names set out in the preceding section are variant spellings of the same generic and specific names. The same fish is, however, everywhere referred to, as the descriptions and figures show.

Two men have sought to make two other forms--one a new genus and species and the other a new species only. In 1865 Gill, as explained above, on the


basis of teeth and vertebm of a great shark from the Gulf of California, differen- tiated a new Whale-Shark, Micristodus punctatus-the spotted shark with the

Text-figure 1.

Chart of the Indian and Western Pacific Oceans, showing the currents by which Rhineodon The circles mark localities where the fish has been

The figures indicate the numbers recorded, while the sign+ indicates t y p w has been distributed. seen or taken. that others were reported by non-scientific observers.

The currents are outlined from the Chart of Currents in the London 'Times' Survey Atlas o f the World, 1922.

tiny teeth. I have examined these teeth in the U.S. National Museum, and find them identical with those of R. typus. Hence this name falls into synonymy.


Furthermore, the photographs by Mr. Murillo and Mr. Sennett of specimens in the Gulf of California are, so far as I can see, of the common Whale-Shark.

He The new species R. pentalineatus was set up by Kishinouye in 1903.

Text-figure 2.

Chart of the Atlantic and of the Eastern Pacific Oceans, showing the currents by which the Whale-Shark has been distributed and the numbers recorded and reported in various localities.

was satisfied that the Japanese specimen belonged to the established genus, but thought it a new species from the fact that it has seven ridges on the dorsal region, as all Rhineodons have. There are a central or mid-dorsal and three

886 MR. E. W. QUDGER ON THE GEOGRAPHICAL

laterals right and left. From his crude figure and from his description of the fish I cannot make a new species. He also relied much on the teeth for evidence as to his new species, but his description does not differentiate these from the teeth of R. typus in my possession. Kishinouye's name must be reduced to SYnOnYmY.

From a study, extending over years, of all figures (especially of photographs) and descriptions of all the Whale-Sharks on record I am persuaded that the family Rhineodontidae has but one genus and one species-Rhineodon typus.

SUMMARY OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF RHIXEODOIV TI'P('S. The Whale-Shark, the largest of its tribe, is a warm-water fish, as both text

and maps (text-figs. 1 & 2) show, being found in the three oceans which lie under the equator. Just what its exact temperature requirements are could only be found after laborious investigation of the ocean temperature of the particular localities where i t has been seen or taken. It is doubtful if such data could be obtained ; certainly the facts would not justify the labour expended. One can, however, note the northern and southern limits of its distribution.

I ts " farthest north '' is Cape Inubo, Japan, 35" 39' N. lat. ; its southern limit is very nearly the same in degrees, Table Bay, South Africa, 33" 55' S. lat. Thus its northern limit is 2452 statute miles from the equator, its southern is 2333 statute miles ; and its extreme range north and south is 4785 statute miles. These extremes are far outside the Tropics in both cases ; 12'9' a t Cape Inubo, or 837 miles, and 10" 23', or 717 miles, a t Table Bay. The explanation is the same in both cases. Cape Inubo is washed by the warm Japan current, which brings Whale Sharks up from their habitat in the Philip- pines ; while the Agulhas Current and its two components, the Mozambique Current and that flowing down the eastern side of Madagascar, must have brought Smith's and Barnard's specimens from the upper western Indian Ocean, and probably from the Seychelles.

However, it should be remarked just here that while only one specimen has been taken off Japan Kishinouye wrote that it is almost abundant during the season for catching the striped bonito. Off South Africa also only one specimen has ever been taken, and no others have been seen or reported. From this I judge that the waters off Cape Inubo are warmer than those of Table Bay. The latter is not far from the region of prevailing westerly winds and ocean drift, and may be expected to have a pretty uniformly lower temperature than Cape Inubo, which is laved by the everflowing warmer Kuro Sivo.

CENTRE OF ORIGIN AND DISPERSAL OF RHI~VEOJION TITTS. Rhineodon typus, like any other species of marine animal life in general,

and of fishes in particular, must have originated in some definite part of the ocean, and thence must have spread throughout adjoining seas and even to far-distant regions in so far as environmental conditions permitted.

A family with many genera and a large number of species might well be thought to have had its species arise in several places from the pre-existing species-i. e . , each species to have thus had its own centre of origin ; but the family Rhineodontida is monogeneric, and the single genus is monospecific. Then this single form must have had a single centre of origin. It would be the height of absurdity to presume for i t a multiple origin.

As to the time of the origin of Rhineodon-its geological horizon-we are entirely ignorant. So far as I know its teeth (the only structures capable of fossilization) have never been found. This is, in part a t least, due to their

DISTRIBUTIOH OF THE WHALE-SHARK. 887

extremely small size-they measure only about 2 mm. high,-which would favour their being readily overlooked where larger teeth would be a t once seen and picked up.

What the presumed single centre of origin was no one can say definitely ; but it must have been where the environmental factors of temperature, food, and freedom from enemies permitted Rhinwdon to flourish best. Particularly for a fish with only 76 recorded occurrences such a region must be the one in which the largest number of specimens has been found over a long period of time, and where the largest number is present to-day. Furthermore, this region must be one for which as a centre one can formulate a theory that will fairly explain how the Whale-Shark has become dispersed over the tropical and warm temperate seas.

In my judgment such a centre of origin and dispersal is to be found in the waters between the southern Philippines and northern Borneo-in the Sulu Sea,-waters lying between 2" and 12" N. lat. Hers there are warm and equable ocean and air temperatures, and evidently an abundance of food. The matter of enemies may be disregarded, since the Whale-Shark has no known ones save man, who occasionally kills it.

As to the number taken in this favoured region, the reported occurrences in the literature are as follows:-Piddington (1835)) one seen in 1816 and a number of others reported in Philippine waters ; Smith (1911)) one specimen ; Jordan (1915)) one fish; Herre (1925)) two specimens; Adams, by letter in 1932, twelve good accounts (eight photographs) ; and about as many more under investigation. Here then are seventeen attested occurrences and a dozen or more reports needing confirmation. Possibly there are some duplica- tions, but with all allowances made there are more individual Whale-Sharks reported for this region that for any other in the world. Furthermore, the reports of Steirnagle and Lee that they have seen schools of Whale-Sharks in the Philippines cannot be disregarded, since their standing as observers is vouched for by scientific men.

For the Sulu Sea Piddington (1835) states that the Chinese fishermen reported it seen. Further, two are reported from Zamboango (by Jordan and by Adams-Dapitan Bay, Zamboango), on the south-east side of the Sulu Sea. In the waters between this sea and the Celebes Sea Herre (1032) saw two fish ; and Adams, Lee, and others have seen or heard of still others. So i t is found here as i t undoubtedly is throughout the East Indies generally.

These large numbers reported from the Philippines-and most of them have either come ashore dead or have been captured-may in part be accounted for by the fact that this archipelago is a large one, composed of thousands of islands, thickly inhabited by a seafaring and fishing population-people who might be expected to notice such an extraordinary fish. Further- more, there are Americans found everywhere, especially government officials, who might be expected to report such occurrences. But back of all is the indisputable fact that the$sh i s there. From only two other regions have even a comparable number of Whale-Sharks been reported-from the Straits of Florida with five specimens captured, and from the Gulf of California with fourteen reported. The specimens from the Straits of Florida are concentrated where the Gulf Stream is compressed between Cuba and Florida. Those recorded from around Cape San Lucas are mainly reported by angling or collecting expeditions which were on the lookout for Rhineodon during two seasons' fishing, and the same fish or fishes may have been seen several times by one or by two or more parties of anglers, whereas the Philippine specimens are mainly fish that have died and come ashore.


METHOD OF DISPERSAL. Since Rhineodon typus is cosmopolitan in the warm waters of the globe,

and since I believe it to have originated in the region of the Sulu Sea, it is now in order for me to attempt to explain how it has become distributed all around the earth-in some seas of which i t would seem to have become so much a t home that i t probably reproduces itself there.

Rhineodon typus is a large and powerful fish, a slow but good swimmer. Hence it is conceivable that it might by swimming have effected its wide distribution ; but this swimming has assuredly been aided and accelerated by ocean currents, and by winds which blow steadily in one direction throughout the year as the trades, or which blow steadily in a given direction during certain seasons as the monsoons.

Mode of Dispersd in the Eastern and Central PaciJic. The most aberrant distribution of the Whale-Shark is in the Central Pacific

with one specimen, and in the Eastern Pacific with a wide north and south scattering. This distribution is then the most difficult of all to account for. The problem of distribution for all the other oceans and regions is easily solved since in them the currents practically join up. This difficult distribution will be considered first.

I n working out the distribution of Rhineodon as helped by currents I have used the chart of ocean currents published in ' The [London] Times Survey Atlas of the World,' prepared at the Edinburgh Geographical Institute under the direction of J. G. Bartholomew, F.R.G.S. The currents shown on plate iv. of this Atlas have been copied as my text-figs. 1 & 2.

Examination of the chart will show that the great Northern Equatorial Current of the Pacific impinges on the Philippine Archipelago and breaks up in two large branches. One of these turns south, south-east, and east, and flows eastward across the Pacific Ocean in about N. lat. 2"-7" as the Equatorial Counter Current. In it and by its help I believe that Whale-Sharks have been carried across the Pacific to the region of Panama Bay. From here, impelled by the south-east monsoon, in the summer there is a drift toward the north-west which would easily help the Whale-Shark up the coast of Mexico to Cape San Lucas and the Gulf of California. I n this connection it must be recalled that all the Rhineodons in this region were reported in late spring and in summer. However, no expeditions are known to have fished these waters a t any other season.

The chart shows a small current setting out from the region of Panama Bay to the Galapagos Islands. The two fish reported from this locality could easily have been carried there by this current.

A very far-wandering fish is that reported by Nation from Callao, Peru, in 1878. I am a t a loss to account for this occurrence, since this coast is swept by the northward-flowing cold Humboldt Current. One might think this a mistaken identification of the basking shark, Cetorhinus maximus, which is found in cold waters and which abounds on this coast, but for Giinther's positive identification of the teeth. The only possible conjecture is that the Whale- Shark swam there.

The most isolated Rhineodon is that reported from the Taumotu Archi- pelago, nearly in the centre of the South Seas. However, it might have been carried west from the Galapagos or the coast of South America in the South Equatorial Current of the Pacific. According to the chart various offshoots of this great current are deflected counter-clockwise into the South Pacific. One of the two eastern small offshoots might have carried this specimen to the Taumotus.

DISTRIBUTION OF THE WHALE-SEARK. 889

Manner of Migration in the Western Pacijic. If the reader will now recall the localities from which the Whale-Shark

has been reported in this general region their relative compactness will favour the belief that this powerful fish might have effected its distribution by swimming alone. However, when one looks at the chart of currents and recalls the trade winds and monsoons of this general region it will be understandable how these powerfully aid the natatory powers of this great shark.

As noted before, the great westward-flowing North Equatorial Current of the Pacific impinges on the eastern side of the Philippine Archipelago. Here it is more or less broken up, but its main body is deflected to the north and by rotation of the earth is still more deflected toward the north-east. As the Kuro Siwo it bathes the Bonin Islands and the Japanese Archipelago, and brings Whale-Sharks to each. Furthermore, this current is aided in the dispersal by the anti-trades blowing from south-west to north-east.

Turning now to the southern part of the western Pacific, i t will be recalled that Whale-Sharks have been reported from the south-east coast of Papua, from the Celebes group, from the northern shores of Java, and lastly from the Gulf of Siam. In these regions, especially a t the times of the monsoons, there is a welter of small currents flowing hither and thither. Especially well marked is the one flowing along the southern coast of New Guinea and off both shores of Java, which might well distribute Rhineodon throughout these islands and into the Gulf of Siam.

the geographical distribution of the whale-shark (rhineodon typus)

Documents