Page 3 - DeMaddalena2003

GREAT WHITE SHARK l GRAND REQUIN BLANC
RESULTS
Although the cast made by Kuttel presents
some deformations of the snout, lower jaw, and
lower surfaces, it is evident that the taxidermist skill-
fully executed an accurate representation of the ori-
ginai specimen on which he had the rare opportuni-
ty to work. The deformations, particularly of the
head, can be readi ly attributed to the parti al deterio-
ration to which the shark was undoubtedly subjected
after its death . Moreover, these deformations were
very probably accentuated by the specimen's storage
during transport to Lausanne. With respect to the
observable deformations of the lower parts of the
cast, it must be borne in mind that the taxidermist
received the shark after it was already gutted, with
the belly cut and consequently deformed.
The morphometric measurements taken from
the mould of the shark and on the largest of its upper
anterior teeth are reported in table l. lt must be noted
that some of the reported measurements present
some differences with respect to the proportions of
the originai specimen, due to the observed deforma-
tions of the cast. Authors compared morphometric
measurements taken from this specimen to measure-
ments taken from a well prepared 4.0 m TOT stuffed
White Shark preserved in the Museum of Natura!
History in Genoa, ltaly, with catalogue number C.E .
27517 (De Maddalena, 2000 b) and the resulting
proportions were very close.
The 5.83 m value obtained for TOT confirm
the accuracy of the length of 5.89 m reported for the
fresh-caught specimen in Anonymous (1956). The
small (6 cm) difference in TOT is attributable to
various factors, such as differences in the way mea-
surements were taken, artefacts of preparation of the
cast, the deformations noted, and differences in posi-
tion of the specimen while the measurements were
taken.
The specimen discussed in this work has been
reported previously in de Beaumont (1957), indica-
ting an approximate length of 5 manda weight of "at
least 1.5 tonnes", and Quignard et al. (1962), but the
length reported by this source (490 cm) was erro-
neous; moreover it has been cited in Séret (1996).
The specimen cited in Fergusson (1996) dated 1976
and reportedly but unconfirmedly measuring 4.5
metres is almost certainly based on the same speci-
men as that described in this work, reported with an
erroneous date and length.
This specimen is not the only White Shark
recorded from Sète, as three other specimens have
been caught in the same area: a specimen about 4 m
long was captured in August 1875, a 2.42 m speci-
men caught in 1876 were reported by Moreau, 1881;
and a female specimen with a reported length of 6 m
was caught on january 9'h 1991 (Anonymous, 1991;
Quignard, Raibaut, 1993; Séret, 1996). On the basis
of photographic evidence, De Maddalena et al.
-55-
(2001) estimate that the latter specimen measured
5.9 m TOT. This specimen was bought by a whole-
sale fishmonger in Sète, offered for sale in the Rungis
market, and bought by a supermarket in Montargis
(Licciardi, Azais, personal communication) . Touret
(1992) reported the same history for a specimen
caught in Antibes during the same month, but accor-
ding to F. Calviera, a fisherman in Antibes since
1956, it was nota Great White Shark that was caught
there. Consequently it seems that only one Great
White Shark was caught in Sète in january 1991.
DISCUSSION
Worldwide, two other comparably large
White Sharks have been preserved complete: a 5.22
m Tln female caught in Kvamer, Croatia, on May
29'h 1906, preserved by taxidermy in the Trieste
Natura! History Museum, ltaly (De Maddalena, 2000
a, 2000 b), and a 5.3 m female caught near Cana-
néia, Brazil, on December S'h 1992 and preserved by
taxidermy in the Vietar Sadowsky Museum in Cana-
néia (Arfelli, Amorim, 1993; Mollet et al., 1996;
Mollet, personal communication). The shark descri-
bed in the present work, of which a mould is preser-
ved in the Museum of Zoology in Lausanne, is lon-
ger than both these specimens and so can be consi-
dered the largest of any complete white shark pre-
sently preserved.
Some reliable cases of White Sharks exceeding
the size of the Lausanne specimen are reported in the
literature, but most of these were not measured accu-
rately and therefore their claimed sizes are estimates
and consequently cannot be regarded as precise. A
large specimen caught in February 1839 off Civitano-
va, ltaly, was reported to measure approximately 6 m
in length and was later estimated to be 6.02 m TL, but
it is not clear if it was ever accurately measured (De
Maddalena, 1998). An enormous specimen caught
off Piombino, ltaly, in 1886 was reported to measu-
re approximately 8-9 m (Biagi, 1995), but to our
knowledge it was never measured. A specimen
caught off Enfola, ltaly, on August 12'h 1938 was esti-
mated to be 5.97-6.13 m TOT, but was never measu-
red (De Maddalena et al., 2001 ). A female of approxi-
mately 6.408 m was reportedly caught off Cojimar,
Cuba, in 1945 (Bigelow, Schroeder, 1948; Guitart-
Manday, Milera, 1974): even if the contestation of
this case presented by Randall (1987) is not accep-
table (De Maddalena et al., 2001 ), it is not clear if the
specimen in question was ever accurately measured.
A male caught off Camogli, ltaly, on March 16'h 1954
was reported to measure 7 m in Tortonese (1965) but
its length was contested by Fergusson (1996). A fema-
le caught off Ganzirri, ltaly, on )une 19'h 1961 was
estimated to be 6.66 m TOT, but was never measured
(De Maddalena et al., 2001 ). Another specimen
caught off Ganzirri, ltaly, on March 9'h 1965 was
reported to measure 6.20 m in length (Berdar, Ricco-