TOOTH VS TOOTH

Sand tiger sharkversusGoblin shark

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

Sand tiger shark profile →
FRONT / LABIAL VIEWEDGE / PROFILESMOOTH 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
Goblin shark profile →
FRONT / LABIAL VIEWEDGE / PROFILESMOOTH 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 MARKSand tiger sharkGoblin shark
Signature

Long, slender smooth-edged cusp with a small cusplet on each side and a two-lobed root.

Tall, narrow, smooth-edged teeth with longitudinal grooves; front teeth are especially slender and fang-like.

Crown

Narrow dagger

Narrow dagger

Edge

Smooth edge

Smooth edge

Cusplets

One on each side

No side cusplets / One on each side

Root

Two distinct root lobes / Rounded U-shaped root

Two distinct root lobes / Rounded U-shaped root

Tooth height

12–48 mm reference range

8–35 mm reference range

Jaw variation

Tall anterior fangs grade into shorter lateral teeth; paired cusplets are common.

Tall anterior fangs become shorter and broader toward the rear.

Habitat

Temperate and subtropical coastal waters, reefs and wrecks.

Deep continental slopes and submarine canyons worldwide.

Diet

Bony fishes, small sharks, rays, squid and crustaceans.

Deepwater fishes, squid and crustaceans captured with protrusible jaws.

Shark size

Usually 2–3 m (6.5–10 ft).

Most known animals are 2.5–4 m (8–13 ft); larger reports exist.

Bite force

No reliable species-specific value is established; bite force changes with body size and bite point.

No reliable species-specific value is established; bite force changes with body size and bite point.

Fossils

Sand-tiger-like teeth are abundant from the Paleogene onward; species assignment is difficult.

The living species is rare, but mitsukurinid relatives have a long fossil record.

SAND TIGER SHARK TRAP

Many extinct sand-tiger relatives look extremely similar and are difficult to separate without age and locality.

GOBLIN SHARK TRAP

Sand-tiger and fossil mitsukurinid teeth can be extremely similar; locality and geologic age often decide the identification.

SOURCE / Sand tiger sharkFlorida Museum
SOURCE / Goblin sharkAustralian 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 sharkversusDusky sharkOpen →Bull sharkversusOceanic whitetipOpen →