The Greenland shark is currently the longest-living vertebrate known on Earth, according to scientists.
The ages of 28 Greenland sharks were determined using radiocarbon dating of eye proteins, revealing that one female shark was estimated to be about 400 years old. This makes it the longest-living vertebrate known on Earth, surpassing the previous record holder, a bowhead whale estimated to be 211 years old.
As Julius Nielsen, a marine biologist from the University of Copenhagen who was the lead author of the study, put it: “We had our expectations that we were dealing with an unusual animal, but I think everyone doing this research was very surprised to learn the sharks were as old as they were.”
Greenland sharks are massive creatures, capable of reaching up to 5m (16.5ft) in length, but they grow at a slow rate of only 1cm per year. They can be found, swimming slowly, in the cold depths of the North Atlantic.
According to the research team, these animals only reach sexual maturity when they reach 4m (13ft) in length, which, based on their estimated age range of up to 400 years, would not occur until they are approximately 150 years old.
The study partly relied on radiocarbon levels in the eye tissue of the sharks, which was made possible by the large amounts of radiocarbon released into the ocean during atmospheric thermonuclear weapons tests in the 1960s. Sharks with higher radiocarbon levels in their eye tissue were determined to be less than 50 years old, while those with lower levels were estimated to be at least 50 years or older.
The researchers then drew up an estimated an age range for the older sharks based on their size, and on prior data about Greenland sharks’ size at birth and growth rates in fish.
According to Nielsen, the analysis has a probability rate of around 95 percent and the sharks were determined to be at least 272 years old, but could be as much as 512 years old (!), with the most likely age being 390 years.
The video below includes some of the extremely rare footage ever made of Greenland sharks.
But why do Greenland sharks live so long?
The long lifespan of these animals is attributed to their extremely slow metabolism and the cold waters they inhabit. They move through the Arctic and North Atlantic waters at a very slow pace, earning them the nickname “sleeper sharks.” Despite having been found with seal parts in their stomachs, the sharks are so sluggish that experts believe they must have consumed the seals when they were either asleep or already dead.
The slower you go, the farther you will get.
It probably went to a Cliff Richard concert when it was a teenager.
How does this creature which looks fairly docile and unthreatening with no visible means of defense (it doesn’t even look like it has teeth). Manage to survive for hundreds of years in the most hostile environment known to mankind? That is the real story.
Neat article. Hilarious comments. Thank you all for the entertainment. Hahaha.
My question is whether this critter was killed to determine its great age. Does not seem clear from the narration, does it?
One of the photos is captioned “…after it was released from research vessel…”
The article says it uses a radiocarbon scan of the sharks eyes to see how fast the proteins have deteriorated to determine the age. Radio carbon levels in the sharks eyes, after 1960’s nuclear bomb testing gave them a reference point, to try to work both forwards and backwards in time, to figure out how old the sharks might be. I hope my eye doctor doesn’t try that nuclear radiation method on me. I’ll willingly give him/her my age.
It literally says the age is determined by length and the cornea of the eyes.
Precisely.
Did you actually read the article ?
It shows a photo with a caption that stated it was released.
Great article, silly comments
Great article!
Imagine science making it possible for sharks to live as people out living everything by using dog ageing for political reasons to proove all is wrong with only biblical means and doing all of this by picking baby noses in in parts of the sky with the most radiocarbon.?
You’ll have to swim very, very slow trough really, really cold water. Wanna try?
I have no idea what you just said
How did they find seal parts in their bellies without killing them?
Maybe they serve the camera down it’s throat? It would, of course, have to be unconscious.
How do physicians remove a substance from a child’s stomach after an accidental overdose?
a. Induce vomiting
b. Gastric suction (stomach pumping)
c. Kill the child
There is such a procedure where they can perform a Gastroscope, putting a small camera down your throat into your stomach, I have had this many times, you can be awake for this procedure or have Sedation or for a child they would have an Anaesthetic…
And no they would not kill the child, that is a stupid statement to make…
I think that was his point
The sarcasm was implied…
What are you smoking, bro?
C….lol
Maybe they examined their excrements.
X ray
These sharks are dragged up in indiscriminate industrial fishing practices like trawling and deep water net techniques. The first specimens were made available as “bycatch”. Imagine that… Four centuries of individual witness to this world, only to be dragged up as the unintended consequence of our pillage and thrown back dead as a piece of rubbish…
It appears that the one in this video was caught with a HUGE hook. Do we really need to know about it so much that we have to harm it to study it? Ridiculous.
I never knew there was anything on earth that could live that long!! I think the calculation methods probably do have a lot of confounding variables to consider but, nonetheless, it’s entirely feasible that an animal could live that long in that sort of environment. I wonder what else is down there…..♥️
Can you not age them more accurately through the ear (rings)?
Sharks are cartilagnous and do not have otoliths or “ear bones”.
They don’t wear earrings…
Why don’t they have a look at its birth certificate?
This article is a perfect example of why people who cannot read, comprehend what they read, nor understand science should ever be allowed to comment on any article about science. Ever.
Correct.
Why?
You’ve contradicted yourself. If a set of individuals cannot comprehend what they read, this implies that they do read, and therefore can read.
On the other hand, if such individuals indeed cannot read, then the premise “they cannot comprehend what they read” is pointless, unless intended as a counterfactual (i.e., ‘If they could read something, they couldn’t comprehend it.’) for which you’ve provided no evidence (and quite probably can’t).
Also, you’ve left out a negative, unintentionally arguing that the aforementioned incapable individuals ever should, ever [sic] be allowed to comment on any article about science.
Best response ever!
I found this article very interesting and informative. Would much rather read and learn about our own world rather than one I will never be able to visit.