[1] During what they call a "surface lunge:” “the shark accelerates from 0.5 BL s71 to 51.5 BL s71 for a period of not less than 2 s, with its jaws held open 5358 and with or without its upper jaw protruded, exposing the upper teeth. During LUN, the eye was *not* rolled tailward in its socket, exposing the whitish scleratic coat” [emphasis RR]

[2] “If... a shark bites you, what we recommend is you should hit the shark in the eye, in the nose, or stick your hand in the gills,” says Chris Lowe, of the California State University Long Beach Shark Lab, in an instructional video. “Those are all sensitive tissues and quite often it causes the shark to release.”

If you are attacked by a shark, a proactive response is advised.  Hitting a shark on the nose, ideally with an inanimate object, usually results in the shark temporarily curtailing its attack. Try to get out of the water at this time. If this is not possible, repeated blows to the snout may offer a temporary reprieve, but the result is likely to become increasingly less effective. If a shark actually bites, we suggest clawing at its eyes and gill openings, two sensitive areas. You should not act passively if under attack as sharks respect size and power.

Another expert says hitting the eyes and gills are better locations, more sensitive. And the nose may be a bad place because you might miss and get closer to the mouth during attack.

[3] http://taylorchapple.wix.com/ecologist; https://schmidtocean.org/person/taylor-chapple/

[4] Described here: https://oceantracks.org/library/scientist-video-taylor-chapple-%E2%80%93-tagging-white-sharks

[5] https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=nMgAXW0AAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao

[6]https://www.ucl.ac.uk/museums-static/obl4he/vertebratediversity/chondrichthyes.html

[7] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17451000.2011.614255 

 "At Seal Island, sharks patrol the waters at average depths of 12–14 m; however, attacks occur over a depth range of ~7–31 m, with significantly higher frequency of attacks occurring over depths of 26–30 m."

[8] most of what is known about the white shark’s mode of prey capture and handling has been inferred from bite wounds and scars on pinnipeds surviving attacks (Tricas & McCosker, 1984; Ainley et al., 1985; McCosker, 1985); bite wounds and scars found on dead pinnipeds, dolphins, sea otters, and turtles " [https://blog1.miami.edu/sharklab/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/2018/09/predatory_behaviour_of_white_sharks_carcharodon_carcharias_at_seal_island_south_africa.pdf

[9] “The longer a predation bout continues or the more numerous capture attempts a white shark makes, the lower its chances of making a successful kill (Figure 3C,D)”  from Martin et al 2005: https://blog1.miami.edu/sharklab/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/2018/09/predatory_behaviour_of_white_sharks_carcharodon_carcharias_at_seal_island_south_africa.pdf

[10] The success of adult great white attacks on pinnipeds is high if the seal is immobilized in less than 1 min, as longer intervals postcapture allow seals to struggle free and escape (Martin et al., 2005). The great white’s inability to effectively hunt large marine mammals at this transitional stage in its ontogeny (o3 m TL) has been ascribed to a lack of suitable dentition (Tricas and

McCosker, 1984).

[11] The white shark, Carcharodon carcharias is the world’s largest predatory fish (Randall,

1983; Compagno, 1984), reaching 7 m in length and weighing up to 2,100 kg (Froese and Pauly, 2002).

[12]A 2014 analysis of catch weights suggests larger is possible: "Reliably measured sharks ranged from 126–602 cm total length (TL) and 16–2530 kg total weight."  https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0094407

[13] fossils thought to be early near relatives of Carcharodon are found in 23 million year old Miocene deposits(Source: http://www.elasmo-research.org/education/white_shark/carcharodon.htm)

[14]  Here we examine the swimming kinematics, in vivo muscle dynamics and functional morphology of the force-transmission system in a lamnid shark, and show that the evolutionary convergence in body shape and mechanical design between the distantly related lamnids and tunas is much more than skin deep; it extends to the depths of the myotendinous architecture and the mechanical basis for propulsive movements. We demonstrate that not only have lamnids and tunas converged to a much greater extent than previously known, but they have also developed morphological and functional adaptations in their locomotor systems that are unlike virtually all other fishes. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature02435

[15] Thrust in thunniform swimmers is largely restricted to the caudal oscillating hydrofoil, which minimizes body drag (Braun and Reif, 1985).

[16]  Collagen fibers wound around the shark’s body and locomotory muscles attach to the skin which is thus a whole-body exotendon whose mechanical advantage in transmitting muscular contraction is greater than that of the endoskeleton. Wainwright et al. 1978:https://science.sciencemag.org/content/202/4369/74

[17]The skin of fast-swimming sharks protects against biofouling and reduces the drag experienced by sharks as they swim through water. The tiny scales covering the skin of fast-swimming sharks, known as dermal denticles (skin teeth), are shaped like small riblets and aligned in the direction of fluid flow (figure 1). Shark-skin-inspired riblets have been shown to provide a drag reduction benefit up to 9.9 per cent

  https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsta.2010.0201 … and Riblets are small surface protrusions aligned with the direction of flow, which confer an anisotropic roughness to a surface. 

[18]We thus hypothesize that the bristled shark skin geometry has the potential to delay flow separation through three possible mechanisms.The first separation flow control mechanism is with respect to the formation of embedded vortices. Their presence within the cavities formed between the scales obviates the no-slip condition which results in increased momentum of the flow in the near wall region. This deters flow separation and maintains globally attached flow under both laminar, transitioning and turbulent boundary layer conditions, thereby working similarly to the mechanism by which dimples on a golf ball control flow separation and reduce pressure drag. In addition, the preferential flow direction of the geometry aids to inhibit flow reversal and, unlike dimples on a golf ball, this property of the surface results in a second separation control mechanism. This unique surface micro-structure may also lead to minimal drag penalty, a byproduct typically associated with passive techniques. Lang et al. 2012 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Philip_Motta/publication/302222571_Shark_Skin_Boundary_Layer_Control/links/5a2956c2a6fdcc8e86733dc4/Shark-Skin-Boundary-Layer-Control.pdf 

[19] Paul Kanive (standing in for Taylor) confirms that it's this fast a shift -- though he says there's some variation based on size.

[20]From 1997 to 2010, we video-recorded white sharks in pursuit of seals from which shark speed during predation events could be estimated. We were able to repeatedly calculate in- water burst speeds around 11 m/s. For example, on 25 August 2000, a 3.4-m white shark swimming at 0.5 m/s fled a larger conspecific, moving across the length of our 8-m observation vessel in 90.8 s. This corresponds to a burst speed of 11.9 m/s. https://blog1.miami.edu/sharklab/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/2018/09/Marine-predator-prey-contests-Ambush-and-speed-versus-vigilance-and-agility.pdf (11.9 m/s = 26.6 mph

[21] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCWT-tBLnD8  Breeching Clips

[22] During KIL (Killing bite), upon initial contact with the prey, the eyes are rolled tailward in their sockets, exposing the whitish scleratic coat. https://blog1.miami.edu/sharklab/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/2018/09/predatory_behaviour_of_white_sharks_carcharodon_carcharias_at_seal_island_south_africa.pdf

[23] Just before the rapid attack, the eyes are rolled back into the orbit to reduce injury and the animal is momentarily without visual input. https://www.hawaii.edu/fishlab/pubs/Tricas%202001a.pdf 

[24] The broad, serrated teeth of adult great whites are characteristic of shark species that gouge chunks of flesh from large prey (e.g., marine mammals),

[25] Upper tooth of white shark photo: https://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/rcb/photogallery/shark_teeth.html; lower teeth: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Carcharodon_carcharias_lower_teeth_juv.jpg

[26]  Paul explained here that while the shark can push its jaw forward and reorient its teeth for the bite-and-clamp, the animal then shakes its head to saw the teeth deeper into the flesh and help tear off a chunk. (Call with Dr Paul Kanive)

[27]  Outward rotation of the teeth and jaw rami describes a plucking action during feeding or prey sampling, while larger bites rotate the frontmost teeth inward towards the gullet. Functionally, this may make the teeth more effective at grasping small prey items or gouging chunks from larger prey.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jmor.1052260304

[28]  Sharks use the spike-like teeth of the lower jaws to hold their prey while the serrated upper teeth saw through the flesh or strip the flesh from bones since sharks are unable to chew.8 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1748681515004118 

[29] In the great white, muscle fibers quickly straighten and remain at nearly orthogonal insertion angles, thus facilitating optimal bite forces (CMF) across a wide range of gape angles; for larger gape angles the great white bites relatively harder than the sandtiger

[30] We have digitally reconstructed the jaws of a white shark to estimate maximum bite force and examine relationships among their three-dimensional geometry, material properties and function. We predict that bite force in large white sharks may exceed c. 1.8 tonnes, the highest known for any living species,

https://faculty.washington.edu/fishguy/Resources/Research_PDFs/2008-great-white-shark-jaw-bite.pdf

[31] A great white for instance could sense a single drop of blood in an Olympic size swimming pool; Discovery says in this clip that sharks can detect a drop of blood in an olympic sized swimming pool. (2:15)

[32] https://www.linkedin.com/in/tricia-meredith-3a726b64/;

[33] http://biology.fau.edu/directory/kajiura/index.php Our lab is primarily interested in the integration of sensory biology and behavior with functional morphology.

[34] The elasmobranch olfactory organs (rosettes) are composed of numerous primary lamellae, which are overlain with an olfactory epithelium and populated with olfactory receptor neurons (ORNs) (Theisen et al., 1986; Zeiske et al., 1986). The number of primary lamellae and total lamellar surface areas were quantified for a minimum of nine individuals for each of the five species.

[35] Lemon sharks average between 8 to 10 feet long as adults, but are generally not considered a threat to humans.

[36] See table 1, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00043259 "The mucosal neural recording (MNR) is a summated multiunit activity from the epithelium and is obtained by use of metal-filled glass capillary electrodes (e.g. Kang and Caprio, 1991). The integrated neural activity (olfactory nerve twig recording, NTR) from small bundles of primary olfactory nerve is also used to monitor olfactory neural activity (Sveinsson and Hara, 1990a,b)."

[37]https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=UAoMLgi_cMgC&oi=fnd&pg=PA251&ots=W120Cn1EqD&sig=usc6oqEj1niqzDPjiruu-W1HKcE#v=onepage&q&f=false

[38] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01927634

[39] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mbXoAGuK58

[40] To record an animal’s responses to odor stimuli, a non-polarizable Ag–AgCl electrode (E45P-M15NH, Warner Instruments, Hamden, CT, USA) fitted with a seawater/agar-filled capillary tube was positioned just above the olfactory epithelium and a similar reference electrode was placed nearby in contact with the animal’s skin. The output from the two electrodes was differentially amplified Fig. 1. Experimental apparatus used to record the electro-olfactogram (EOG). Animals were secured onto a platform in an experimental seawater (SW) tank and ventilated with SW. The tank was supplied with mechanically and chemically filtered SW through a PVC manifold. One manifold arm delivered a constant flow of SW through a flow meter; paired, computer-controlled, three-way solenoid valves; and an odor delivery pipette (ODP, inset), which was inserted into the incurrent naris. Amino acid stimuli were delivered through the ODP to the olfactory organ. Paired, non-polarizable, Ag–AgCl electrodes recorded the EOG. The glass tip of the active electrode (Act E, inset) was positioned in the SW immediately above the  olfactory epithelium while the glass tip of the reference electrode (Ref E, inset) contacted the skin adjacent to the naris. The output was differentially amplified (1000–10,000), filtered (high pass 0.1 Hz, low pass 0.1 kHz, 50/60 Hz), digitized (1 kHz) and recorded. THE JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY Elasmobranch olfaction 3451 (DP-304, Warner Instruments) at 1000–10,000, filtered (0.1Hz– 0.1kHz, 50/60Hz) (DP-304, Warner Instruments & Hum Bug, Quest Scientific, North Vancouver, BC, Canada), digitized at 1kHz using a Power Lab® 16/30 model ML 880 (AD Instruments, Colorado Springs, CO, USA) and recorded using ChartTM Software (AD Instruments). http://jeb.biologists.org/content/jexbio/213/20/3449.full.pdf 

[41] The EOG has been used to assess the response of populations of the cells that bear the olfactory receptor proteins, the olfactory receptor neurons (ORNs). In recent years, the EOG has become an important tool for evaluating the effects of genetic manipulations and for studying other properties of the olfactory receptor sheet. For this reason, it is now useful to review some of the properties of this activity with a view to understanding its strengths and limitations. We have also tried to review some of the practical issues in recording EOGs. According to our current understanding, odorants bind receptor proteins on ciliary membranes projecting from the ORNs into the mucus. These receptors act through second messengers to open ion channels leading to depolarization https://analyticalsciencejournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jemt.10133 

[42] The EOG, termed the underwater EOG for fish (Silver et al., 1976), is a large (of the order of millivolts) negative voltage transient consisting of two major components, phasic and tonic (Evans and Hara, 1985). The EOG differs considerably in size and shape, depending upon the type of stimuli, methods of application, and species. EOG recording has the advantage of obtaining olfactory activity with minimal surgery and is widely used as an experimental tool in monitoring olfactory sensitivity to odorants. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00043259 

[43] from Fig 1: "odor delivery pipette (ODP, inset), which was inserted into the incurrent naris." -- so odors are being squirted directly into the shark's nose, not just dropped into the tank. [https://jeb.biologists.org/content/jexbio/213/20/3449.full.pdf]

[44] Meredith was testing responses to 20 common amino acids, and blood is full of amino acids. https://jeb.biologists.org/content/jexbio/213/20/3449.full.pdf 

[45] https://www.pnas.org/content/116/10/4446 This paper is an exploration of the white shark genome that explores the genes expected to be associated with smelling-- it found a more limited set of smelling genes than expected, but suggests maybe the sharks are using a different set of genes to smell. The electrophysiology research shows that the sharks are smelling different odorants, so at most this paper suggests they might be using a different set of chemical receptors than other vertebrates to do it. Even if the processing pathway is different, the end behavioral result is the same.

[46] We found that elasmobranches and teleost fishes have comparable amino acid thresholds and that gross epithelial surface area (i.e. not taking into account secondary lamellae) is not a good predictor of olfactory sensitivity http://jeb.biologists.org/content/jexbio/213/20/3449.full.pdf 

[47]  Tricia found: “Thresholds to amino acid odorants, major olfactory stimuli of all fishes, ranged from 10–9.0 to 10–6.9moll –1” and see oncorhynchus nerka (Sockeye salmon) in Table 1 here: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00043259 and also https://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/f72-207#.XP576y2ZMWo

[48] Sightings by New South Wales Fisheries staff, including Vic Peddemors and Amy Smoothey, have revealed that bull sharks regularly swim close to hundreds of human swimmers in Sydney Harbour and ignore them all (ABC 2011). In Cape Town, South Africa, the Shark Spotters program has reviewed more than 1,100 sightings of white sharks swimming around surfers and near bathers. Bathers were alerted and got out of the water, and the visiting sharks swam away (Shark Spotters 2012). This story repeats itself in Port Stephens, Australia, where shark biologist Barry Bruce has studied juvenile white sharks that consistently ignore people in the nearby surf (Gilligan 2012).”

[49] https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/shark-attacks/trends/beach-attendance/ 

[50] E.g. La Jolla is a popular surfing beach - and sharks hang out there: See especially Fig 1 in https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tobey_Curtis/publication/225356254_Movements_and_Swimming_Behavior_of_Three_Species_of_Sharks_in_La_Jolla_Canyon_California/links/53fb76480cf22f21c2f32b03.pdf

[51] http://www.sharkattackfile.net/incidentlog.htm and downloaded the excel file. Found one instance of a shark biting a surfboard at Waddell Creek (the surf beach in question) in 1999. No injuries.

[52] https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2011/compendia/statab/131ed/2012-statab.pdf 58,670,000  adults went to the beach in 2010, table 1240 (page 764)- US census

[53] Although most of these interactions result in minor injuries akin to that of a dog bite, about six of the 75–100 unprovoked attacks that currently occur worldwide each year result in human mortality [12]. ...the majority of all shark attack outcomes were non-fatal (85%), and typically less than about 25% of attacks were fatal in countries with >50 attacks since 1960.

[54] The 2018 worldwide total of 66 confirmed, unprovoked cases was lower than the most recent five-year (2013-2017) average of 84 incidents annually. There were five fatal attacks this year, four of which were confirmed to be unprovoked. These numbers are in line with the annual global average of six fatalities per year.

[55] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08920753.2014.942046 see Figure 1

[56] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0211049#pone-0211049-g002 See Figs 2, 3, 4. The rates of shark attack are increasing somewhat in Hawaii, southern Australia, and eastern USA, meaning that the number of reported shark attacks has increased relative to the population in those places. Tourism suggested to explain “rate” increase in those spots

[57] While this increase can in part be explained by an increasing human population, the number of shark bites has increased threefold, while human population growth in the same period has increased by 52% (World Bank 2013). …..Overall, an increase in human population alone is not a sufficient explanatory factor for increases in unprovoked shark bites, although it clearly does play a role (West 2011).

[58]  figure 2- they plotted attack times with when people were in the water and found "Both plots rise in early morning to a peak at about 1100 hours, falling off at about lunchtime, followed by a larger peak at midafternoon, and finally falling again to low numbers at about nightfall. These similarities, coupled with the observations regarding higher incidence on weekends, indicate that the rate of occurrence of shark

attack is strongly associated with numbers of people in the water"

[59] Indeed, higher shark bite incidences occur during non-school and work days (Monday, Wednesday and week-end), when ocean users abundance is higher28. This result is compatible with the hypothesis that a higher abundance of ocean-users increases the probability of a shark bite19. 

[60] “TV tip-over fatalities in USA 2010-2012 = 51; shark bites in USA over same period = 124 but shark fatalities USA 2010-2012 = 3 ] https://www.cpsc.gov/content/the-tipping-point-highest-number-of-tv-and-furniture-tip-over-deaths-recorded-by-cpsc-in; https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/01/30/tvs-tip-over-on-toddlers-with-surprising-frequency-causing-injuries-and-deaths/?utm_term=.c155b49a4014

[61] The authors used their MR estimates to suggest a 943 kg white shark could survive on 30 kg of marine mammal blubber for approximately 1.5 months; a widely cited figure that has perpetuated the assumption that large sharks only need to feed every few weeks to maintain net energy gain. [Taylor Chapple]

[62] Five white sharks...had the remains of  harbor seals, elephant seals, and unidentified marine mammals in their stomachs. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1444603?origin=JSTOR-pdf&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents 

[63] For example, the caloric density of seal No.6, a normal yearling, was 3.60 kcaljg, a total gross energy value of 59 760 kcal. The fat content of the seal was 26% (4.3 kg), amounting to 41 159 kcal or 68.8% of the total gross energy.

[64]http://www.publish.csiro.au/zo/ZO9870207

[65] 7,000 kcal/kg.  so if you're eating a bite of blubber (~30kg) you're getting an intense packet  (~ 200,000 kcal/kg) of useable energy per bite. [Email Taylor Chapple]

[66] And this makes a lot of sense when you consider that when female seals reproduce, they're stuck on land caring for a pup for a month or more, during which time they also have to make milk for the pup. If they didn't have a really energy-rich body store, it'd be an impossible metabolic job.

[67] From a 1960 Sport Illustrated: “...their favored quarry is the creature in distress, the straggler, the hurt and the unfit, whether it be fish or fowl, man or dog. The shark preys on the living but takes also the dead and the long-dead and the rubbish of the sea, scavenging at times with the voracity of a deranged goat, eating wood and rocks, bottles, paper cups and tin cans.”

[68] “Sharks are clearly not mindless eating machines, as they have been labelled in the past. They are intelligent and have complex patterns of movement, space utilization, and social organization.” See pg 145 on foraging behavior and diet selection.

[69] Despite multiple encounters with potential prey, [tiger] sharks rarely engaged in prolonged high-speed chases, and did not attack prey that were vigilant.

[70] Not going after sea otters: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ece3.5209 See Discussion

[71] Unpalatable chemical (uropygial secretions) or tactile (feathers) cues exuded by seabirds may also lead White Sharks to reject and not consume seabird prey…. Similarly, Sea Otter have dense fur and secred pungent oil from their anal glands…

[72]Media release, with video showing the sharks not going after food https://phys.org/news/2019-05-tiger-sharks-revealed-lazy-predators.html. Co-author Dr. Adrian Gleiss of Murdoch University's Harry Butler Institute compared tiger sharks to lions. "They don't waste energy stalking prey that are already aware of them and can easily escape," Dr. Gleiss said. "These sharks minimise energy output and chances of success by sneaking up on unsuspecting turtles and large fish."; paper referenced: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2019.00229/full (quote from paper below)

[73] From 2019- Sharks did not pursue vigilant or fleeing prey, and no bursts were observed in the direction of prey when prey were in the field of view

 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2019.00229/full 

[74] Older paper showing a similar thing-  http://sci-hub.tw/10.1007%2Fs00227-001-0711-7 "another interesting result was the relatively how frequency of fast chases after prey and the lack of attacks on prey items that were inspected.” (page 245, left side)

[75] https://dspace.mote.org/bitstream/handle/2075/679/MTR%20A-1974.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Victims as a group employed the actions listed in the table in 539 instances …. Table 10 is not very encouraging at first glance, for it implies, with the notable exceptions of probing the eyes and gills of the shark, that no matter what is done in terms of fighting back more often than not there will be little or no effect upon the shark. [but gills occasionally backfired and very little data on gill probes] see “struck at shark” and “kicked at shark” in table - most likely found “no effect” or “insignificant effects”

[76] Residency, Habitat Use and Sexual Segregation of White Sharks, Carcharodon carcharias in False Bay, South Africa https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0055048

[77] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2989/02577618909504556

[78] https://sydney.edu.au/arts/government_international_relations/staff/profiles/chris.pepin-neff.php; https://www.christopherneff.com

[79] If the attacks in given areas are studied. a most striking feature is the occurrence of many of the attacks in sets or sequences. Examples of several attacks in One area over a short period have been reported. On August 8. 1899. three shark attacks occurred at Port Said in the same vicinity. Between July 6 and July 12, 1916. on the bathing beaches of New Jersey in Sandy Hook Bay at the mouth of New York Harbour. four bathing fatalities took place which were ascribed to a white shark. In New Guinea. early in 1931, attacks occurred in the same viclnlty on three successive days. Somewhat similar sequences are apparent in Australian attacks

[80] Pg 47 “...the trail of the rogue shark leads all over the world” -Shark Attack (1958), Victor Coppleson

[81] Pg 57 -Shark Attack (1958), Victor Coppleson

[82] Pg 67 -Shark Attack (1958), Victor Coppleson

[83] Victor Coppleson was a surgeon, and published a lot of research papers on surgery, (see: Google Scholar)

[84] Coppelson 1950: The evidence, which includes the freedom from attacks over long periods, the continued presence of man-eating sharks, the attacks in sequence, and cessation of attacks once a particular shark is caught, 'suggests the guilt, not of many sharks, but of one shark. It suggests the presence of a Vicious shark which patrols a certain area of the coast, of a river or of a harbour, for long periods…..Such a shark must be hunted until it is destroyed.

[85] About 30 seconds in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1fu_sA7XhE 

[86] 

https://variety.com/1975/film/reviews/jaws-1200423515/; http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/first-film-blockbuster

https://www.indiewire.com/2017/06/jaws-modern-blockbuster-steven-spielberg-1201844390/

https://www.newspapers.com/clip/32321153/

https://www.newspapers.com/clip/32321270/

https://www.newspapers.com/clip/32321339/

[87] the really comprehensive data collection project - the international shark attack file - has been collecting data since 1958. https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/shark-attacks/ 

[88] 1899 Suez Canal Egypt- Doctor refutes claims of one shark, 1916 New Jersey: 

[89] Pers. communication with International Shark Attack File and Australian Shark Attack File, etc.

[90] Five unprovoked shark attacks are reported from Sharm-El-Sheikh, Egypt, between 30 November and 5 December 2010. Three of the five attacks are attributed to an oceanic whitetip shark, Carcharhinus longimanus with a distinctive crescent-shaped notch in the upper lobe of the caudal fin. The shark was observed during the first attack on a snorkeler and photographed underwater during the second shark attack on a swimmer

[91] Reconstruction of the damaged limb in case 2 by sewing together skin, soft tissue, and muscle bundles...revealed that no soft tissue was missing. The bite didn't remove any tissue, but it had the damned bad luck to hit the guy's femoral artery.

[92]  ...the majority of all shark attack outcomes were non-fatal (85%), and typically less than about 25% of attacks were fatal in countries with >50 attacks since 1960

[93] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1748681515004118 Table 1

[94]  A majority of victims sustained only one bite site, with 311 victims (6.8%) sustaining two bite sites and 25 victims (0.5%) sustaining three bite sites.

[95] In a part of Florida known as the “shark attack capital of the world”:  In cases where the type of shark could be identified, about half involved species not associated with fatal attacks (blacktip shark, Carcharhinus limbatus, 20 %; spinner shark, Carcharhinus brevipinna, 16 %; nurse shark, Ginglymostoma cirratum, 7 %; sand tiger, Carcharias taurus, 6 %). These species tend to inflict small bites or scrapes on a hand, foot, arm, or leg that do not result in life-threatening wounds.

[96] Medical records were reviewed for the 96 documented shark attack victims since 1921. Calculated levels of injury in the SIT Scale reveal 40 Level 1 injuries (41.7%), 16 Level 2 injuries (16.7%), 18 Level 3 injuries (18.8%), 14 Level 4 injuries (14.6%), and eight Level 5 injuries (8.3%).  

[97] Victims of shark attack usually sustain only minor injuries.

[98] In Australia: Of the 186 incidents recorded for the past 20-year period, 117 incidents (63%) resulted in an injury to the victim. Fatalities accounted for 22 incidents (11.8%), which include eight incidents where the body was not recovered (six attributed to a white shark and two to a tiger shark). The fatality rate is consistent with the International Shark Attack File (ISAF) global fatality rate of 10.1% for the same period.

[99] Minor injuries were sustained in 231 cases (4.6%) and surprisingly, no injuries were reported in 716 cases (14.2%)

[100]  Dr.  George  Burgess,  who  was  curator  of  the  Shark  Attack  File  that  contains  information  on  shark  attacks   worldwide,   found   that   10.4%   of   white   sharks   attacks  on  humans  involved  no  bite  at  all,  while  56.8%  of  the victims had only one bite to their bodies.  He found only 32.8% with more than one bite.  Again, white sharks did not usually  consume  the  human  attacked. (In Peter Klimely’s book Chapter 6 p 112)

[101] We obtained all unprovoked shark attack data from the International Shark Attack File [12], the longest running and most inclusive data source on global shark attacks.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6392223/

[102]Although shark attacks have been reported from several families of large carivorous sharks ,,, only a few species comprise the majority of all attacks… Most attacks on man may not be motivated by hunger, but instead are either defensive or offensive aggressive encounters. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00045229 

[103] Official FAO statistics (FAO, 2011–2014) conservatively put the average declared value of total world shark fin imports at USD377.9  million per year from 2000  to 2011, with an average annual volume imported of 16 815 tonnes. In 2011, the last year for which full global data are available, the total declared value of world exports was USD438.6 million for 17 154 tonnes imported. The corresponding 2000–2011 annual average figures for shark meat were 107 145 tonnes imported, worth USD239.9 million; while in 2011 only, the reported figures for total world imports of shark meat were USD379.8  million and 121  641  tonnes for value and volume, respectively.

[104] In particular, the global demand for shark fins and the associated practice of ‘finning’ (slicing off a shark’s fins and discarding the carcass at sea) are widely portrayed as the greatest threats to sharks. This perception is not supported by scientific evidence.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982217304827 

[105] The vast majority of shark fins are destined for consumption in a relatively small selection of countries and territories in East and Southeast Asia such as China, Hong Kong SAR, Taiwan Province of China, Singapore, Malaysia and Viet Nam.

[106] http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4795e.pdf Table 6

[107] Our results showed that oceanic whitetip, silky, and mako sharks in longline fisheries are more likely to be retained than finned. As a result, even a fully effective prohibition on finning would not address the primary source of mortality to these species. https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2012.01943.x 

[108] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-38270-3#Sec15 figure 2- spiny dogfish (which is a type of shark) was most common, especially for takeaway. Essentially, takeaways were dominated by a single species (“S. acanthias was assigned as the identity to 91.0% of products”)

[109] https://www.afma.gov.au/fisheries-management/species/gummy-shark

[110] https://theconversation.com/flake-is-sustainable-gummy-shark-except-when-its-not-40628

[111] http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4795e.pdf US is in top 20-- see table 6

[112] https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/Assets/commercial/trade/Trade2016.pdf 

[113] . However, the greatest perceived threat for elasmobranchs, and in particular for pelagic sharks, is their incidental capture in fisheries directed at more valuable species [11,13,18,19]. Approximately 50% of the global shark production is composed of sharks caught as bycatch in the high seas pelagic longline fisheries [18]. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0308597X14003546?via%3Dihub 

[114] http://www.fao.org/3/i2743e/i2743e05.pdf

[115] Bycatch is the most frequent threat for sharks, accounting for 66.9 % of shark species reported by the IUCN that are facing conservation threats.    

[116] From 1992 to 2000, 961 individual longline hauls were observed, during which 4,612 elasmobranchs (15% of the total catch) were documented.

[117] https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/00590/elife-00590-v1.pdf Overall, we estimate that one-quarter of chondrichthyans are threatened worldwide, based on the observed threat level of assessed species combined with a modeled estimate of the number of Data Deficient species that are likely to be threatened.  

[118] E.g. https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/39369/10185838

[119] Great whites are on the ICUN red list as Vulnerable (one step down from Endangered). https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/3855/10133872 

[120] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0074648 We provide evidence consistent with the hypothesis that the loss of sharks can have an impact that propagates down the food chain, potentially contributing to mesopredator release and altering the numbers of primary consumers… One interpretation of the correlation between low numbers of sharks and herbivorous fishes on our study reefs is that this is evidence of a trophic cascade. These occur when changes in the abundance of higher-order predators directly and/or indirectly affect species at a number of lower trophic levels in a food web. 

• But see https://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/abstract/S0169-5347(16)30049-0 

[121] This review (2016) doesn’t think sharks would play into the trophic cascade https://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/fulltext/S0169-5347(16)00059-8?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0169534716000598%3Fshowall%3Dtrue “While sharks perform important direct and indirect ecological roles, the evidence to support hypothesised shark-driven trophic cascades that benefit corals is weak and equivocal….” but there’s evidence for other roles they play. Another review (2010) concludes https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01489.x “large sharks can exert strong top-down forces with the potential to shape marine communities over large spatial and temporal scales. Yet more empirical evidence is needed to test the generality of these effects throughout the ocean.”

[122] The historical presence, then absence, and now presence of wolves in Yellowstone National Park (YNP) represents a natural experiment through time and an opportunity to study cascading trophic interactions. During the seven-decade wolf-free period, the collapse of a tri-trophic cascade allowed elk (Cervus elaphus) to significantly impact wildlife habitat, soils, and woody plants.

[123] https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1890/08-0964.1  Our results provide strong support for regional declines of larger predatory fish in the Baltic Sea promoting algal production by decreasing invertebrate grazer control.

[124] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs13280-011-0158-0 ( in Atlantic and Baltic coasts of Sweden): Based on synthesis of monitoring data, we suggest that offshore exploitation of larger predatory fish has contributed to the increase in mesopredator fish also along the coasts, with indirect negative effects on important benthic habitats and coastal water quality.

[125] Intro to trophic cascades across ecosystems theory

[126] The historical presence, then absence, and now presence of wolves in Yellowstone National Park (YNP) represents a natural experiment through time and an opportunity to study cascading trophic interactions. During the seven-decade wolf-free period, the collapse of a tri-trophic cascade allowed elk (Cervus elaphus) to significantly impact wildlife habitat, soils, and woody plants.

[127] Despite uncertainty about the northern Yellowstone elk data, there is little doubt that wolves have contributed to the recent decline of the northern elk herd. p3  

[128] Shark Week has contributed a vast amount to shark science and conservation over its 30 years… in fact most of the people you see on Shark Week now, watched it when they were younger and grew up with a love and fascination of sharks. (Email from Discovery)