Table 2. Species identified in port landings sample and fin products sample.
| Port landings/species | N (%) | IUCN | Fin products/species | N (%) | IUCN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| aPrionace glauca | 109 (47.2) | NT | aPrionace glauca | 106 (33.5) | NT |
| aCarcharhinus falciformis | 18 (7.8) | NT | aCarcharhinus falciformis | 43 (13.6) | NT |
| aAlopias superciliosus | 17 (7.4) | VU | cCarcharhinus coatesi | 37 (11.7) | NE |
| aAlopias pelagicus | 16 (6.9) | VU | Carcharhinus macloti | 32 (10.1) | NT |
| Etmopterus pusillus | 16 (6.9) | LC | aSphyrna lewini | 20 (6.3) | EN |
| aIsurus oxyrinchus | 13 (5.6) | VU | cHemigaleus australiensis | 18 (5.7) | LC |
| Centrophorus granulosus | 7 (3.0) | VU | Carcharhinus sorrah | 9 (2.8) | NT |
| aDeania quadrispinosa | 6 (2.6) | NT | Carcharhinus sealei | 6 (1.9) | NT |
| Mobula japonica | 5 (2.2) | NT | Rhizoprionodon acutus | 6 (1.9) | LC |
| aSphyrna zygaena | 5 (2.2) | VU | aAlopias pelagicus | 5 (1.6) | VU |
| Galeus sauteri | 3 (1.3) | DD | aCarcharhinus limbatus | 5 (1.6) | NT |
| aSphyrna lewini | 3 (1.3) | EN | aIsurus oxyrinchus | 5 (1.6) | VU |
| bCarcharhinus sp. | 2 (0.9) | VU | aCarcharhinus longimanus | 4 (1.3) | VU |
| aCarcharhinus plumbeus | 2 (0.9) | VU | cLamna nasus | 4 (1.3) | VU |
| Apristurus macrorhynchus | 1 (0.4) | DD | aCarcharhinus brevipinna | 3 (0.9) | NT |
| aCarcharhinus longimanus | 1 (0.4) | NT | Rhizoprionodon taylori | 3 (0.9) | LC |
| Carcharhinus sorrah | 1 (0.4) | NT | aAlopias superciliosus | 2 (0.6) | VU |
| Dalatias licha | 1 (0.4) | NT | aGaleocerdo cuvier | 2 (0.6) | VU |
| aGaleocerdo cuvier | 1 (0.4) | VU | Carcharhinus altimus | 1 (0.3) | DD |
| Isurus paucus | 1 (0.4) | VU | Carcharhinus amboinensis | 1 (0.3) | DD |
| Mobula tarapacana | 1 (0.4) | DD | Carcharhinus tjutjot | 1 (0.3) | DD |
| Mobula thurstoni | 1 (0.4) | NT | Loxodon macrorhinus | 1 (0.3) | LC |
| Odontaspis ferox | 1 (0.4) | VU | Rhynchobatus australiae | 1 (0.3) | VU |
| cSphyrna tiburo | 1 (0.3) | LC | |||
| Total | 231 | Total | 316 |
The identified species were ranked according to the sample number, with the percentages shown in the parentheses. The conservation status of the identified species was expressed as an abbreviation (EN: endangered; VU: vulnerable; NT: near threatened; LC: least concern; DD: data deficient) and a bold letter highlighted species present in both the port landings and fin products.
a Species also presented in the shark meats examined in Liu et al. (2013).
b Only the genus was identified; The conservation status was assigned based on Carcharhinus obscurus.
c Species not found in Taiwan’s waters.