New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Slowly Evolving Elephant Shark Offers Clues about Why Some Fishes Have No Bones

The elephant shark is a relic of a bygone age. Like the coelacanth , it is sometimes referred to as a “living fossil,” a creature alive today that has changed little since it first evolved hundreds of millions of years ago.

Byrappa Venkatesh, PhD

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The elephant shark is a relic of a bygone age. Like the coelacanth, it is sometimes referred to as a “living fossil,” a creature alive today that has changed little since it first evolved hundreds of millions of years ago. But besides its prehistoric outward appearance—including the trunklike snout from which it gets its name—the elephant shark boasts a genome that is remarkably different from the genomes of most other living vertebrates, according to a study published online January 8 in Nature. (Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group.)

Researchers from the Agency for Science, Technology and Research in Singapore, along with collaborators at several other institutes, sequenced and analyzed the elephant shark’s genome. They hoped to gain insight into the evolution of bony skeletons, because elephant sharks (like other sharks, mantas and rays) have skeletons made of cartilage, a trait that is now rare among vertebrates but was the norm when elephant sharks first evolved.

The scientists discovered that elephant sharks have most of the genes necessary for bone formation, except for a family of genes called the secretory calcium-binding phosphoprotein gene cluster. They think these genes evolved after the elephant shark and its relatives split off from the other fishes that would eventually develop bones.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


In their analyses the investigators also found something unexpected: the immune systems of the elephant sharks differ markedly from those of most other vertebrates. Whereas most vertebrates have several different groups of immune helper cells, elephant sharks appear to have only one type.

Because the elephant shark has changed so little from its original form—it is the slowest evolving of all known vertebrates, according to the study—this species offers a rare look into the evolutionary past. It allows researchers to make many more predictions about other ancient species than would be possible from fossils or other preserved remains.

Geoffrey Giller

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe