The Caribbean reef shark infrequently attacks humans. In general, a shark attack on a human is behaviorally similar to an attack upon natural prey. A human is more susceptible to being attacked if the shark is cornered and feels that there is no escape route. In situations like these, the shark may rake the victim during the attack resulting in lacerations.
The Caribbean reef shark has an interdorsal ridge from the rear of the first dorsal fin to the front of the second dorsal fin. The second dorsal fin has a very short free rear tip. The snout of C. perezi is moderately short and broadly rounded. It has poorly developed, low anterior nasal flaps and relatively large circular eyes. Caribbean reef sharks also have moderately long gill slits with the third gill slit lying above the origin of the pectoral fin. Comparison to similar sharks:
The Caribbean reef shark was originally described from off the coast of Cuba as Platypodon perezi by Poey in 1876. Bigelow and Schroeder later described the same species as Carcharhinus springeri in 1944 and the reef shark appears in much literature under this scientific name. The genus name Carcharhinus is derived from the Greek “karcharos” = sharpen and “rhinos” = nose. The currently accepted valid name is C. perezi (Poey 1876).
Although still abundant at Cocos Island and other relatively pristine sites, grey reef sharks are susceptible to localized depletion due to their slow reproductive rate, specific habitat requirements, and tendency to stay within a certain area. The IUCN has assessed the grey reef shark as Near Threatened; this shark is taken by multispecies fisheries in many parts of its range and used for various products such as shark fin soup and fishmeal.[2] Another threat is the continuing degradation of coral reefs from human development. There is evidence of substantial declines in some populations. Anderson et al. (1998) reported, in the Chagos Archipelago, grey reef shark numbers in 1996 had fallen to 14% of 1970s levels.[30] Robbins et al. (2006) found grey reef shark populations in Great Barrier Reef fishing zones had declined by 97% compared to no-entry zones (boats are not allowed). In addition, no-take zones (boats are allowed but fishing is prohibited) had the same levels of depletion as fishing zones, illustrating the severe effect of poaching. Projections suggested the shark population would fall to 0.1% of pre-exploitation levels within 20 years without additional conservation measures.[31] One possible avenue for conservation is ecotourism, as grey reef sharks are suitable for shark-watching ventures, and profitable diving sites now enjoy protection in many countries, such as the Maldives.[6]
While scientists are still trying to determine exactly how many of theses species exist, we do know that many of these sharks lose their lives from getting caught in fishing nets. Not only does it significantly reduce their population, it compromises the fragile ecosystem around coral reefs. Many new laws and regulations are being put into place to protect this ever important fish.
Cyanobacteria do not have skeletons and individuals are microscopic. Cyanobacteria can encourage the precipitation or accumulation of calcium carbonate to produce distinct sediment bodies in composition that have relief on the seafloor. Cyanobacterial mounds were most abundant before the evolution of shelly macroscopic organisms, but they still exist today (stromatolites are microbial mounds with a laminated internal structure). Bryozoans and crinoids, common contributors to marine sediments during the Mississippian (for example), produced a very different kind of mound. Bryozoans are small and the skeletons of crinoids disintegrate. However, bryozoan and crinoid meadows can persist over time and produce compositionally distinct bodies of sediment with depositional relief.