ReviewPeerJ2023
Phylogeography of sharks and rays: a global review based on life history traits and biogeographic partitions.
Review in PeerJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic Diversity and Population Structure of Squalus cf. mitsukurii (Chondrichthyes: Squalidae) Revealed by ddRAD Sequencing.Animal genetics · 2026Article
- Phylogeography of the widely distributed John Dory (Zeus faber, Actinopterygii: Zeiformes) reaffirms the prevalence of at least two deeply divergent clades.Journal of fish biology · 2026Article
- A genomic test of sex-biased dispersal in white sharks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Global stock structure of the Silky shark (PeerJ · 2025Article
- Detailed characterization of the complete mitochondrial genome of the oceanic whitetip shark Carcharhinus longimanus (Poey, 1861).Molecular biology reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Considerable research exists on the life history traits, evolutionary history, and environmental factors that shape the population genetic structure of marine organisms, including sharks and rays. Conservation concerns are particularly strong for this group as they are highly susceptible to anthropogenic stressors due to a combination of life history traits including late maturity and low fecundity. Here, we provide a review and synthesis of the global phylogeography of sharks and rays. We examined existing data for 40 species of sharks belonging to 17 genera and 19 species of rays belonging to 11 genera. Median joining haplotype networks were constructed for each species for the mtDNA cytochrome C oxidase subunit I (COI), and an Analysis of Molecular Variance (AMOVA) was conducted to understand patterns of genetic diversity and structure across the three major ocean basins-the Indian, Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Haplotype networks showed very shallow coalescence in most species, a finding previously reported for marine teleosts. Star topologies were predominant among sharks while complex mutational topologies predominated among rays, a finding we attribute to extremely limited dispersal in the early life history of rays. Population structuring varied amongst species groups, apparently due to differences in life history traits including reproductive philopatry, site fidelity, pelagic habitat, migratory habits, and dispersal ability. In comparison to reef-associated and demersal species, pelagic and semi pelagic species showed lower levels of structure between and within ocean basins. As expected, there is variation between taxa and groups, but there are also some broad patterns that can guide management and conservation strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.