TOOTH VS TOOTH

Bull sharkversusDusky shark

Two original visual plates. Ten comparison fields. One careful verdict.

Bull shark profile →
FRONT / LABIAL VIEWEDGE / PROFILEFINE EDGEPOSITION CHANGES SHAPE● ANTERIOR● LATERALTUFFSHARK ORIGINAL TOOTH PLATEDIAGRAMMATIC · NOT TO SCALE
Original TuffShark vector illustration. Trait emphasis is diagrammatic; it is not a specimen photograph or a substitute for an associated jaw.
VS
Dusky shark profile →
FRONT / LABIAL VIEWEDGE / PROFILECOARSE EDGEPOSITION CHANGES SHAPE● ANTERIOR● LATERALTUFFSHARK ORIGINAL TOOTH PLATEDIAGRAMMATIC · NOT TO SCALE
Original TuffShark vector illustration. Trait emphasis is diagrammatic; it is not a specimen photograph or a substitute for an associated jaw.
IDENTIFICATION VERDICT

These teeth overlap in both broad form and edge treatment. Root proportions, jaw position, size, age and locality must carry more weight than silhouette alone.

FIELD MARKBull sharkDusky shark
Signature

Broad, heavily serrated upper tooth or a narrower lower tooth with finer serrations.

Broad, slightly oblique serrated upper teeth with narrow, erect, finely serrated lower teeth.

Crown

Broad triangle / Narrow dagger

Broad triangle / Narrow dagger

Edge

Fine serrations / Coarse serrations

Coarse serrations / Fine serrations

Cusplets

No side cusplets

No side cusplets

Root

Wide / nearly flat root / Two distinct root lobes

Wide / nearly flat root / Two distinct root lobes

Tooth height

10–38 mm reference range

8–36 mm reference range

Jaw variation

Broad serrated uppers cut; narrower finely serrated lowers grip and pierce.

Broad serrated uppers and narrow finely serrated lowers.

Habitat

Warm coastal seas, estuaries and freshwater rivers.

Warm-temperate and tropical continental shelves and offshore waters.

Diet

Fishes, rays, sharks, turtles, birds and mammals.

Fishes, sharks, rays, cephalopods and crustaceans.

Shark size

Commonly 2–3.2 m (6.5–10.5 ft); large females can be longer.

Commonly 2.5–3.5 m (8–11.5 ft); large animals approach 4 m.

Bite force

A theoretical study calculated 36–2,128 N anteriorly and 170–5,914 N posteriorly across 73–285 cm sharks.

No comparable whole-jaw species-wide value is established for this guide.

Fossils

Carcharhinus-type teeth are common, but exact bull-shark attribution can be difficult.

Fossil teeth are reported, but isolated teeth may only be identifiable to genus or family.

BULL SHARK TRAP

Single upper teeth overlap strongly with dusky, sandbar and oceanic whitetip sharks. Exact species ID may require jaw position or locality.

DUSKY SHARK TRAP

Exact identification of an isolated upper tooth is often unsafe; bull and oceanic whitetip are major confusers.

SOURCE / Bull sharkFlorida Museum
SOURCE / Dusky sharkFlorida Museum

Illustrations are original TuffShark diagrams, not photographs taken from either reference.

+

KEEP COMPARING

Other difficult tooth pairs.

Great white sharkversusTiger sharkOpen →MegalodonversusGreat white sharkOpen →Bull sharkversusOceanic whitetipOpen →Bull sharkversusGreat hammerheadOpen →