Arquivo da tag: Tubarões

Biólogos encontram antidepressivo no cérebro de tubarões do litoral do Rio de Janeiro (The Conversation)

Artigo original

Publicado: 16 junho 2026 06:50 -03

Por Mariana Batha Alonso e Leonardo Vazquez

sertralina é o antidepressivo mais prescrito do Brasil. Em 2025, as vendas de antidepressivos e estabilizadores de humor cresceram 11% em relação ao ano anterior.

Um levantamento nacional indica que 18,6% mais brasileiros usaram medicamentos para saúde mental entre 2022 e 2024.

O que poucos sabem é que parte dessas pílulas percorre um segundo caminho depois de metabolizada pelo organismo: sai pela urina, entra no esgoto e vai direto para o mar.

E no Rio de Janeiro, além de toda a beleza do mar, também tem tubarões.

O encontro que ninguém esperava

Projeto EcoShark, coordenado por mim, professora do Instituto de Biofísica Carlos Chagas Filho da UFRJ, monitora a saúde de tubarões na costa fluminense desde 2018. Essa investigação contou também com outros cientistas como José Neto e Victor Alves, e é uma iniciativa pioneira sobre contaminantes emergentes em elasmobrânquios.

Biólogos do EcoShark no processo de identificação e estudo de tubarões no litoral Sul Fluminense. Arquivo pessoal.

Ainda a ser publicado, mas já compartilhado no âmbito da UFRJ, o estudo identificou a sertralina — o ingrediente ativo do Zoloft e de dezenas de genéricos — no tecido cerebral de tubarões-martelo (Sphyrna lewini e S. zygaena), classificados como espécies criticamente ameaçadas de extinção (IUCN, Ibama)

Tubarões-martelo foram capturados acidentalmente em redes de pesca no Recreio, Barra da Tijuca e Copacabana – graças a uma parceria entre pescadores e pesquisadores da UFRJ. Como predadores de topo, eles bioacumulam tudo o que está na cadeia alimentar, na água e no sedimento. E, cada vez mais, o que sobra nessa cadeia são os resíduos da nossa medicina.

A rota do remédio

Como um antidepressivo humano chega ao cérebro de um tubarão? O caminho é menos surpreendente do que parece.

Uma pessoa quando toma sertralina, o organismo metaboliza grande parte do fármaco no fígado. A sertralina pode ser excretada inalterada ou metabolizada e ambos alcançam os sistemas de esgoto.

As estações convencionais de tratamento de esgoto foram projetadas principalmente para remover matéria orgânica, nutrientes e microrganismos. E a remoção de compostos farmacêuticos costuma ser incompleta. Por isso, resíduos de antidepressivos e seus metabólitos são detectados em efluentes tratados e em ambientes aquáticos.

No estado do Rio de Janeiro, apenas cerca de 47% do esgoto gerado era efetivamente tratado, segundo dados recentes do Sistema Nacional de Informações sobre Saneamento (SNIS).

Parte significativa do esgoto é lançada no oceano pelos emissários submarinos de Ipanema e da Barra da Tijuca. Com tratamento preliminar, esses sistemas não removem fármacos, liberando moléculas no ambiente costeiro, absorvidas por peixes e invertebrados marinhos diretamente da água ou da alimentação.

Em tubarões, diversos contaminantes se acumulam em tecidos específicos, especialmente no fígado. No caso da sertralina, sua afinidade por tecidos ricos em lipídios e pelo sistema nervoso pode ajudar a explicar sua detecção no cérebro dos animais.

Não é um caso isolado

O Rio de Janeiro não está sozinho nesse mapa. Em março de 2026, um estudo publicado na revista Environmental Pollution revelou que 28 de 85 tubarões amostrados próximos à ilha de Eleuthera (Bahamas), apresentaram concentrações detectáveis de cocaína, cafeína e analgésicos no sangue.

Arquivo pessoal.

Pesquisadores brasileiros testaram amostras e encontraram antibióticos e opioides em tubarões. O achado mudou a percepção: se drogas aparecem em tubarões de uma ilha caribenha com baixa densidade urbana, o que esperar dos que nadam a menos de 1 km das praias do Rio? O estudo também detectou alterações fisiológicas nos animais, sugerindo que essas substâncias podem afetar sua bioquímica.

Por que o cérebro do tubarão é o problema

A sertralina, que age sobre a serotonina no cérebro humano, foi detectada no tecido cerebral de tubarões. Isso remete à exposição e bioacumulação. Como esse transportador de serotonina é muito semelhante entre vertebrados, a droga poderia teoricamente interagir com proteínas de animais. Mas atenção: a detecção, por si só, ainda não permite afirmar que houve alteração comportamental ou fisiológica nos bichos.

A ciência já sabe: em laboratório, zebrafish expostos a 0,1 µg/L de sertralina – concentração achada em águas costeiras – desenvolveram hipolocomoção e retardo no aprendizado, com alterações no sistema serotoninérgico.

O que ainda não se sabe – e é a pergunta que o EcoShark tenta responder – é o que esses compostos fazem com um elasmobrânquio. Tubarões têm neuroquímica distinta dos peixes ósseos, mais parecida com a dos mamíferos. A resposta, por ora, é um ponto de interrogação com uma centena de quilos.

Uma pergunta que não pode ser ignorada

O Brasil registra o maior índice de letalidade de incidentes com tubarões no mundo. Em 2021, a taxa de mortalidade registrada chegou a 30% — comparado a 1% nos Estados Unidos e 14% na Austrália.

Arquivo pessoal.

Não, não estamos sugerindo que antidepressivos nos oceanos causem ataques. Mas a pergunta que a ciência tem a obrigação de fazer é outra: se essas drogas, em concentrações relevantes, alteram o comportamento de peixes em laboratório, o que realmente acontece com tubarões cronicamente expostos a elas nas zonas costeiras mais poluídas do mundo?

O que está em jogo além do óbvio

A descoberta de sertralina no cérebro de tubarões-martelo do Rio de Janeiro toca em três crises que o Brasil ainda trata como separadas.

A primeira é a crise de saúde mental. O consumo de antidepressivos no Brasil cresceu 12,4% entre adultos de 29 a 58 anos no período de 2023 a 2025. Esse crescimento não é um problema em si. É um avanço no diagnóstico e no acesso ao tratamento. Mas cada comprimido tem um segundo destino que não está sendo monitorado.

A segunda é a crise de saneamento. Enquanto cerca de metade do esgoto fluminense segue sem tratamento capaz de remover compostos farmacêuticos, o oceano continuará funcionando como receptor da nossa farmácia doméstica.

A terceira crise é a da conservação: o tubarão-martelo, espécie criticamente ameaçada, é essencial para o equilíbrio marinho – sua presença regula e estabiliza a cadeia trófica. Alterar a neuroquímica desse animal é um experimento involuntário e sem controle.

O que precisa mudar

Três ações são urgentes e não se excluem. Os protocolos de monitoramento ambiental do Brasil precisam incluir o rastreamento sistemático de fármacos em tubarões, raias e cetáceos. A metodologia já existe – são os projetos EcoShark e EcoDELFIS. O que falta? Financiamento continuado e uma política pública que valorize e reconheça os medicamentos como poluentes emergentes.

As estações de tratamento de esgoto do país precisam ser modernizadas para remover micropoluentes farmacêuticos.

O financiamento à pesquisa de ecotoxicologia marinha precisa ser ampliado. O Brasil tem uma costa de quase 8 mil quilômetros, uma das maiores biodiversidades do planeta e, agora, tubarões com antidepressivos no cérebro.

A sertralina foi criada para aliviar o sofrimento humano. Que ela chegue ao sistema nervoso de um predador a poucos quilômetros de Copacabana é o registro mais preciso de até onde essa geração deixa suas marcas.


As pesquisas foram financiadas pelo PIBIC-UFRJCapes e Faperj. A realização do SubProjeto EcoShark dentro do Projeto de Pesquisa Marinha e Pesqueira foi uma medida compensatória estabelecida pelo Termo de Ajustamento de Conduta de responsabilidade da empresa PRIO, conduzido pelo Ministério Público Federal – MPF/RJ.

Confessions of a Shark Anthropologist (Anthropology News)

Anthropology and Environment Society

April 22, 2015

Patrick Nason

Earlier this year I received a phone call from an unknown number. “This is the National Geographic Channel. Is it true that you are a shark anthropologist?” I paused— “Yes, I guess you can say that.” “Great, we are doing a program about sharks and are asking experts why sharks attack at certain times and in certain places more than others. Can you tell me a bit about your work?”

My interest in sharks began in 2005 during an internship at a resort in Papua New Guinea. Ten miles from shore and ninety feet below the surface, a twelve-foot hammerhead shark swam straight at me, stopping only three feet away before turning to rejoin its group. As it moved gracefully into the deep, I caught my breath and returned to the surface.

Four years later, I was working on a dive boat in South Florida when a sport-fishing boat motored past with a large grey hammerhead hung from its rigging. For a brief moment, I thought it was the shark I encountered years before. And why couldn’t it be? Like whales, most species of sharks are highly migratory. They have little respect for exclusive economic zones, marine protected areas, or any other enclosures. What might appear as absolute freedom in these animals has led to the production of an abstract image of sharks as transgressive predators, menaces to society, and worthy targets of sport. Regardless of what the category of the shark has become, the individual animal hanging from that fishing boat was certainly dead—no longer a terrible monster.

Sharks Arranged for Sale at Fish Market, Indonesia (Photo credit: Patrick Nason)
Sharks Arranged for Sale at Fish Market, Indonesia (Photo credit: Patrick Nason)

This incident took place in 2009, just after Rob Stewart’s film Sharkwater revealed the decimation of global shark populations by the finning industry. Considering the importance of sharks to healthy marine ecosystems, surely it was wrong to continue killing them for sport. Thinking I might do some good, I spoke with the captain of the boat about their catch.

“Couldn’t you release them from now on?” I asked.

“They normally die during the fight.”

“Well, what about fishing for something else?”

“Sailfish and marlin are not in season,” he said. “And besides, the clients are paying for the experience, and they want their photo taken with the big sharks.”

“Yes but hammerhead populations are in serious decline.” I said.

“We catch plenty of them, and easily too. More this year than last.”

I was stuck. How could I prove something was threatened when local knowledge suggests otherwise? Even worse, how could anyone prove sharks were in decline when, as free-roaming marine animals, they cannot be easily counted?

That same year, National Geographic aired a documentary entitled Drain the OceanThe promotional abstract read: “In this special, we look at what most call ‘The Final Frontier.’ Using the newest data from scientists all over the world and the latest advancements in computer generated imaging, we are able to explore some of the most dramatic landscapes the Earth has to offer.” This was exactly what my argument lacked—quantitative support through technological innovation. If computers could reveal the geological truths of this invisible realm, perhaps they could also reveal the ecological truths of a planet in decline—dolphins tangled in drift nets, massive whales with harpoons rusting in their backs, and dwindling populations of sharks swishing their tales through the muddy terrain. If this could be done, then maybe I could convince the fisherman that killing sharks for money was wrong.

But draining the ocean is not yet possible, nor should it be. Even if through some technological means we could illuminate the other seventy percent of our planet, the lives and the forms of relationality between humans and marine animals (however contentious they may be) would change at the moment of discovery. In trying to protect sharks, neither scientific nor emotional appeals alone are sufficient to effect social change. There remains a mystery of what oceanic animals do, how they do it, and exactly how many are required to keep doing what they do. If this mystery were completely resolved, the result would be equally harmful to marine life and to those who make their living upon the sea; for this unknown marks the distinction between our terrestrial selves and aquatic others, and is therefore what makes knowledge of the ocean (and thus ourselves) possible.

 An Anthropology of the Ocean

My phone call with National Geographic didn’t last long. The producer ended it by saying, “Your work sounds interesting, but we are looking for more evidence about why these attacks are occurring. Could you recommend a good marine biologist?” I did, and promptly hung up. I thought about our conversation—I don’t even know what a shark anthropologist is, and I’m supposed to be one! 

As human interests are directed into the sea in the form of extractive industry, state securitization, renewable energy, and conservation enclosure, we find ourselves as a species grappling with the politics and hermeneutics of the life aquatic. Responding to this with continued interest in the protection of marine life and forms of relationality, I have begun to sketch an Anthropology of the OceanWorking alongside indigenous fishing communities, ecologists, oceanographers, and drawing on the work of fellow anthropologists like Stefan Helmreich, such an approach examines how oceanic spaces and bodies are imagined, explored, and controlled, and how rights to marine resources are established and translated across social, spatial, and categorical boundaries

Within this framework, an Anthropology of Sharks could do the following: 1) draw upon the history of anthropological theory and method to ask how valuable spaces become ‘final frontiers,’ 2) describe how these produced frontiers are explored, claimed, enclosed—in short, how they are settled, and 3) reveal the forms of dispossession and disenchantment that occur when such settlement attempts to cultivate spaces have already been occupied by other ways of being and knowing. Putting a multispecies twist on subaltern studies and postcolonial anthropology, this approach would not only ask if the shark could “speak,” but if and how it might be heard amid the cacophony of other voices.

Patrick Nason is a doctoral student in the Department of Anthropology at Columbia University, and a blogger at the Shark Research Institute.

Has a marine mammal conservation program become too successful? (Slate)

Great White Sharks Are Back

By |Posted Tuesday, July 2, 2013, at 4:05 PM

Great white shark.

Today, a great white shark sighting is more likely to elicit curiosity than fear. Cape Cod sharks even have their own advocacy group. Photo by Steven Benjamin/iStockphoto/Thinkstock

When a tourist from Colorado was bitten by a great white shark last summer while swimming off Cape Cod, an excited media made predictable comparisons to the 1975 blockbuster Jaws. The 50-year-old man, who was fortunate to survive with bites to his legs but with all his limbs still attached, was the first human to be attacked by a shark in Massachusetts waters since 1936. As more sighting reports poured in, 2012 became Cape Cod’s “Summer of the Shark.”

We all love a good shark scare, but in this case the coverage wasn’t completely exaggerated. In 1974, when Jaws was filmed just off the cape on Martha’s Vineyard, great white sharks—known to marine biologists simply as white sharks—were rare, with one or two spotted in New England waters each year. In 2012, there were more than 20 confirmed sightings at Cape Cod beaches, and so far this summer two beaches have been closed temporarily after the sharks’ telltale dorsal fins were seen just offshore. Scientists have now tagged 34 great whites off of Cape Cod, and the data show the minivan-size fish sticking to a clear migration pattern—down south or out to sea in the winter and, like the Kennedys, back to the cape every summer.

Jaws aside, these sharks are not hunting unsuspecting vacationers. They’re after seals, which have soared in population in recent years thanks to a national conservation effort that has proven enormously successful—some might say too successful. The shark resurgence comes down to simple food chain economics, but it also shows how wildlife conservation can sometimes have weird and unpredictable consequences.

Seals have a tendency to hang around boats and snatch fish from nets, and for centuries people fishing off New England would kill any seal they saw. Between the late 19thcentury and the early 1960s, the state of Massachusetts offered a bounty of up to $5 for every pinniped slaughtered. By 1972, harbor seals, once common on Cape Cod, were becoming rarer, and gray seals were all but wiped out. But that year Congress passed the Marine Mammal Protection Act, a law that forbids the killing, capture, or harassment of whales, dolphins, polar bears, manatees, seals, and similar animals—creatures that commercial hunting and other human activity had taken, in some cases, to the brink of extinction.

The act has been a tremendous success. In March 2011, a one-day count of gray seals in Massachusetts waters found 15,756 of them, compared to 5,611 in 1999. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration estimates that the gray seal population in the Western Atlantic grew annually between 6 and 9 percent during the past three decades. Today, seals haul out and lounge on some beaches in enormous numbers, and it’s common to see them swimming alone or in pairs up and down the Atlantic side of Cape Cod. That’s a lot of shark bait. One recent afternoon at Nauset Light Beach, part of the Cape Cod National Seashore, I stood on the sand with a group of beachgoers watching a sleek brown head bobbing just past the breakers. Having been warned by prominent signs not to swim near seals, none of us were going near the water. “Does this mean there are sharks out there?” one woman asked, in a tone that revealed both anxiety and fascination.

Tourism is Cape Cod’s main industry, with domestic visitors spending some $850 million in 2011, and locals worry that if anyone were to be killed or badly hurt by a shark, tourists might start to avoid cape beaches. In an effort to educate people about shark safety, beach authorities have erected notice boards, and towns are using a $50,000 state grant to print brochures with helpful shark safety tips—chief among them, “Avoid swimming near seals.” Looking to South Africa, which has been dealing with great white sharks for years, Cape Cod officials have talked about setting up a system for shark detection, perhaps by using spotter planes or installing more acoustic buoys to track tagged sharks. But so far there isn’t enough funding for a major effort.

Seals are taking the blame for luring sharks, and at the same time the old resentment is flaring up among some fishermen, who say seals are harming the cape’s struggling fishing industry. Gordon Waring, a seal specialist at the NOAA, cautions that marine biologists don’t actually know how seals interact with fisheries, and so far there is no sign that they are eating more than their habitat can support. But it is clear that seals are attracted to fishing boats and piers, and fishermen who watch seals stealing fish from their nets justifiably resent the greedy creatures, which the Marine Mammal Protection Act says can’t even be shooed away (that would be “harassment”). Fish stocks, particularly of cod, are down, and while that’s mostly due to other factors such as decades of overfishing, seals are a visible target for blame. There has even been talk of a seal cull, and a Nantucket-based group calling itself the Seal Abatement Coalition is lobbying Congress to remove gray seals from the list of species covered by the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Seal culls are already a regular occurrence in Canada, which has historically had much larger seal populations.

That might all sound like we’re headed for a return to the era when seals were shot on sight and sharks stalked and killed to protect swimmers, but in truth there are heartening signs that humans’ relationship with ocean life off Cape Cod will be better this time around. While a horror movie starring an animatronic shark could once keep people out of the water all summer, today, a great white sighting is more likely to elicit curiosity than fear. Cape Cod sharks even have their own advocacy group.

Gray seal hanging around at the Chatham Fishing Pier.Seals have a tendency to hang around boats and snatch fish from nets. Courtesy of Amy Crawford

“As tragic as a shark attack is, it would be more tragic not to have sharks in our oceans,” says Cynthia Wigren, who last summer helped found the Atlantic White Shark Conservancy, a Cape Cod group (with an adorable smiling shark logo) that raises money for education and research. Greg Skomal, a shark biologist with the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, has been leading an effort to tag great whites and study their migration patterns. He sees the sharks’ return as an indication that the marine ecosystem off New England is returning to normal, with sharks playing a crucial role as apex predators. That’s great news, ecologically speaking. But as he points out, “That does not take into consideration the negative impacts that can occur with the restoration of a natural ecosystem.”

Sharks are not the brightest animals in the sea. Humans are not a preferred prey animal, but sharks looking for seals sometimes get confused. Given that their primary way of interacting with the world is to use their mouths (in a way, maybe they are the “mindless eating machines” of the Jaws trailer), a shark may give a human swimmer a good “gumming,” Skomal says, before realizing it hasn’t found a seal. “If sharks wanted to eat humans, we’d have a hell of a lot more shark attacks,” Skomal says. “These are instinctive wild animals, and they make mistakes every now and then. It’s extremely rare, but nonetheless they make mistakes.”

While a great white shark’s honest mistake can still be terrifying—just ask that tourist who got bitten last summer—sharks’ public image seems to be evolving as conservationists educate people about the need to protect vulnerable species and as our understanding of nature becomes more sophisticated. We may be learning to adapt to nature, rather than forcing it to adapt to us.

Nowhere is that more apparent than in Chatham, a 300-year-old fishing village on the elbow of Cape Cod that has found itself at the epicenter of the wildlife resurgence. InJaws, small town leaders tried to cover up shark attacks, fearing they would be bad for business. But Lisa Franz, director of Chatham’s Chamber of Commerce, says the opposite has been true—at least so long as no one has been seriously hurt. While the local fishing industry is struggling, other businesses are capitalizing on people’s curiosity about sharks and the seals they feast on. Shark T-shirts and stuffed toys are flying off gift shop shelves, and there’s talk of making Chatham an ecotourism destination.

“When the first shark hits the newspapers, we get busier earlier,” says Keith Lincoln, who runs a Chatham cruise business that specializes in seal tours. His “office,” parked recently in a lot at the Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, is a Honda Odyssey with an inflatable shark strapped to the roof—“a hit with the tourists,” he says. But while passengers might say they want to see sharks, Lincoln is not sure they know what they’re getting into. He has seen great whites swimming near the beach, their huge forms casting dark shadows on the sand below. “We usually don’t tell people,” he says. “They leave here all brave, but when they see a fish that’s as big as the boat, they’re not so brave.”

Then again, he might just need a bigger boat.

Watch Discovery Channel’s joking take on the shark frenzy for seals here.