Regional hotspots and drivers of shark meat consumption in India

Over one third of shark and ray (henceforth elasmobranch) species are threatened by global extinction. Overfishing, driven largely by human consumption of various products is a key threat to >95% of threatened elasmobranch species. The local consumption of elasmobranch meat is an emerging driver of these fisheries particularly in the Global South. Very little data exists on local elasmobranch meat consumption and restaurants offer a useful insight into patterns of consumption. We examined local elasmobranch consumption in India, which has the world's third highest elasmobranch catches. We surveyed 2649 seafood restaurants across 10 coastal states and found that two states alone accounted for 70% of all restaurants serving shark meat. Nine percent of all seafood restaurants advertised elasmobranch meat. 251.6 tonnes, equivalent to 9.8% of India's annual landings, is sold every year in India's restaurants. The drivers of these sales are local cultural affinities and regional cuisines, with evidence of new and evolving consumption pathways, in states like Goa. In Goa, the state with the highest prevalence of elasmobranch meat on restaurant menus, consumption by locals, as well as consumption of “baby sharks” by tourists was driving the demand for elasmobranch meat. Small‐bodied and juvenile sharks of threatened species are at risk from local meat consumption. Elasmobranch meat consumption can be reduced by targeting interventions in the regional hotspots of maximum consumption, substituting other types of seafood as alternatives in regional cuisines, bycatch reduction, increased price and seafood consumer awareness campaigns. Preliminary findings suggest that focusing on the health implications of eating species that concentrate heavy metals will produce the greatest decreases in elasmobranch meat sales at India's restaurants.

Over one-third of elasmobranch (shark and ray) species are threatened with extinction globally and overfishing driven by human consumption is a key threat to >95% of these threatened species (Dulvy et al., 2021).Research on consumption has largely focused on global shark fin and gill raker trade, which, as predominantly luxury products, have received considerable conservation attention (Clarke et al., 2006;de Mitcheson et al., 2018;Steinke et al., 2017).Recent trends indicate that even as the fin trade continues to imperil threatened species (Cardeñosa et al., 2022), there is increasing evidence of more complex drivers, such as local elasmobranch meat consumption, particularly in the Global South (Akhilesh et al., 2023;Bornatowski et al., 2018;Karnad et al., 2020).Elasmobranch meat trade is actually higher in volume and value than the fin trade, comprising 63.41% of the total elasmobranch trade value (US$ 4.1 billion between 2012 and 2019) but remains poorly studied at local scales (Niedermüller et al., 2021;Rangel et al., 2021).With elasmobranch meat consumption driving their fisheries in some parts of the world, improving our understanding of this is key to conserving this threatened group of species (Barbosa-Filho et al., 2019;Bornatowski et al., 2018;Karnad et al., 2020).
The northern Indian Ocean is particularly critical for elasmobranch conservation, with high fishing pressure and local species extinctions (Dulvy et al., 2021).In India, there is a ban on live-finning and on fin exports for all elasmobranch species, while 10 species (out of 174 species) were completely protected (at the time of this study) from any fishing and trade (Akhilesh et al., 2023).Consequently, elasmobranch fishing continues, being driven by legal local meat consumption, which is likely increasing in the context of declines in teleost fish catch (Karnad et al., 2020).India has an established tradition of local and regional elasmobranch meat consumption (Haroon, 2010;Karnad et al., 2020).For instance, in nineteenth-century India, shark meat was consumed by women after childbirth (Day, 1889).Consumption in India, like the rest of South Asia, continues today and includes not only sharks but also guitarfish, wedgefish, stingrays and devil rays, in fresh and dried form (Haque et al., 2021;Hossain et al., 2013).Species, such as Spadenose shark (Scoliodon laticaudus; Near Threatened), Milk shark (Rhizoprionodon acutus; Vulnerable), Gray sharpnose shark (R. oligolinx; Near Threatened) and Reticulate whipray (Himantura uarnak; Endangered), are consumed due to perceptions about their being lactogogues (enhancing milk production).Reticulate whipray is also perceived as being useful to treat dysentery, wheezing and bronchitis among traditional medicine practitioners of Tamil Nadu state (Esakkimuthu et al., 2018).Consumption was historically limited to the poorer sections of society, including coastal and tribal people (Haroon, 2010).But demand for fresh, salted, and dried elasmobranch meat has increased since the 1960s and 1970s in South Asia and globally (Frej & Gustafsson, 1990;Jit et al., 2014).Even deep-sea sharks like Bramble shark (Echinorhinus brucus; Endangered), Bluntnose sixgill shark (Hexanchus griseus; Near Threatened), Bigeye thresher shark (Alopias superciliosus; Vulnerable), Centrophorus spp.and Squalus spp.are now consumed in India (Akhilesh, 2014).Despite this evidence, there is little research on patterns of domestic meat consumption, particularly in India, which is the world's third highest exploiter of elasmobranchs (Gupta et al., 2022;Lack & Sant, 2009).
Understanding elasmobranch meat consumption as an important driver of fishing will allow us to identify leverage points for changing unsustainable behaviors (Veríssimo et al., 2020).Restaurants are an important driver of, and mirror, household seafood consumption patterns in India (Karnad et al., 2021).Restaurants have also been implicated in promoting elasmobranch meat consumption, such as in China (Fabinyi & Liu, 2014).Research on restaurant menus offer insight into shifts in fisheries landings, supply chains and consumer preferences (Van Houtan et al., 2013).Therefore, this research examines the sale and consumption of elasmobranch meat in India's restaurants.We hypothesize that the prevalence and availability of elasmobranchs in restaurants with online menus across 10 coastal states suggests that elasmobranch meat is no longer limited to lower economic classes in India.We explore the species groups involved, the consumption by specific clientele, and the key characteristics of restaurants that serve elasmobranchs through a detailed study in Goa, the state with the highest elasmobranch availability in restaurants.Here, we specifically examine whether tourism is driving elasmobranch meat consumption.We also investigate elasmobranch meat prices, whether demand is created through a restaurant's recommendation, and the factors that might promote restaurants' switching to alternatives to elasmobranch meat.

| Hotspots of prevalence and availability
To evaluate the prevalence and availability of elasmobranch meat in restaurants, we conducted surveys of online restaurant menus (methodological details in Table 1) in two cities each among 10 coastal states between October 2020 and December 2021 (Table 2).Restaurants without an online menu were excluded.Cities having the largest population and a seafood eating culture were chosen in each of the 10 locations and divided equally between two investigators.For each city, the investigator scanned restaurant aggregator apps (Zomato, Swiggy and Dineout) and Google Maps to make a list of all restaurants within the city's pincodes, whose menus were visible online.From this list, vegetarian restaurants and restaurants that did not serve seafood were eliminated from the next stage of the analysis.Often the eliminated restaurants could be recognized by their name (e.g., the words "pure veg" in the name).Where restaurants could not be recognized in this way, their menus were scanned for the presence of seafood (including elasmobranchs).Menus of the retained restaurants that served seafood were scanned for pre-identified keywords (Table 1), including English and local language names for sharks and rays, as well as names of dishes known to contain elasmobranch meat.The following information was recorded for restaurants that served elasmobranch meat: type of restaurant, cuisine, names and prices of seafood and elasmobranch meat containing dishes, average cost of eating at the restaurant (provided by restaurant aggregators), contact details for the restaurant.Using the average price of eating at the restaurant, restaurants were classified into price categories-high (>9 USD), medium (3-9 USD) and low (<3 USD).Based on cuisine, restaurants were classified into regional, multicuisine or international cuisine.

| Interviews
Elasmobranch-serving restaurants in each city were stratified based on the price category, and within each category in each city, three restaurants were selected to be interviewed by randomization in R (RStudio Team, 2020).Where there were fewer than three restaurants in a category, all restaurants were selected to be interviewed.Due to the higher prevalence of elasmobranch meat serving restaurants in Goa, we interviewed up to 12 restaurants per price category, as restaurants were spread through the state, rather than being restricted to cities. Restaurants in Goa were additionally identified and spatially assigned to zones based on tourism-High Tourism (>20,000 tourists per month), Medium Tourism (10,000-20,000 tourists per month) and Low Tourism (<10,000 tourists per month), with data obtained from the Department of Tourism (Government of Goa, 2019).There were more restaurants in the High Tourism Zone, therefore more restaurants were interviewed in this zone.We also included an opportunistic sample of elasmobranch serving seasonal restaurants and beach shacks in Goa whose menus were not available online.

| Species, clientele and alternatives to elasmobranch meat
Semistructured interviews were conducted with owners and managers of these randomly selected restaurants to explore species consumed, clientele, demand and restaurant key characteristics (Appendix S1).Semi structured interviews consist of a mix of open-ended and multiple choice (or closed ended) questions and are a standard methodological tool in ecology and conservation social science (Young et al., 2018).Interviews were conducted in English and local languages.
To corroborate responses about supply-demand and provide context from the consumption perspective, we opportunistically (since shark fin exports are illegal and elasmobranch fishing bans are contentious in India) identified three elasmobranch traders (>10 years experience) as key informants for qualitative interviews.We had previously built trust with these local elasmobranch meat traders, allowing for more honest and deep discussions about the meat trade and the responses of restaurant owners and managers about prices, supply-demand dynamics and markets.We also conducted a focus group discussion with three experienced restaurant owners in Goa (who did not participate in interviews) to explain and verify data about demand and alternatives to shark meat.The focus group participants were also asked to rank and discuss three types of arguments against serving elasmobranchs in their restaurants; namely (i) ecological, (ii) conservation and (iii) health-related and their responses were transcribed.Ethics clearance for the semistructured interviews, interviews with traders and focus group discussions were obtained from Ashoka University's Institutional Review Board, which follows the principles set forth in the Belmont Report.

| Data analysis
Data from the online menus were analyzed using R (RStudio Team, 2020) and Microsoft Excel.Since prices of the same dish varied between restaurants in the three price categories, elasmobranch dish prices were standardized as a proportion of the average cost of other seafood at each restaurant.Descriptive statistics were produced from interview data.Monte Carlo simulations (10,000 iterations; Ulam & Metropolis, 1949) were used to calculate the reported elasmobranch meat served in the subset of restaurants interviewed.Classification trees helped to identify the characteristics of elasmobranch meat consumers in Goa.

| Hotspots of prevalence and availability
Among the selected cities, we identified 2649 seafood restaurants with online menus, of which 292 mentioned shark meat on their menus (Table 2).No restaurant specifically mentioned rays on their menu, although traders (n = 3) report the substitution of less expensive ray meat for shark meat in restaurants.The state of Goa (35.8%) had the highest percentage of elasmobranch meat selling restaurants, followed by Tamil Nadu (34.6%) and Maharashtra (4.6%) (Figure 1).Restaurants in Gujarat, West Bengal and Odisha did not feature elasmobranchs on the menu (Karnad, 2022).Only one restaurant out of 2649 (in Hyderabad) advertised shark fin soup as part of its Chinese cuisine (Table 2).
Prices for elasmobranch meat dishes in restaurants were available only for the cities of Chennai, Hyderabad, Mumbai, Puducherry and Thane (Figure 2).Of these, most restaurants that served elasmobranchs were in the medium and low-price category with the average price being USD 2.6 ± 0.5 per dish.The highest prices for elasmobranch dishes were in Chennai (9.72 USD) and the lowest prices in Hyderabad (2.01 USD) (Figure 2).The mean quantity of shark meat reportedly (n = 144) sold in restaurants varied from 0.25-20.9(±4.8) kg per restaurant per week.Altogether restaurants with online menus featuring elasmobranchs could sell 251.6 (±35.2) tonnes of elasmobranch meat sales per year, which is about 83,866 sharks weighing 3 kg each (average weight of small-bodied sharks) and is equivalent to 9.8% of India's annual elasmobranch landings (MPEDA, 2020).

| Interviews
A total of 146 phone interviews (in all sampled states) and 21 in-person interviews (in Goa only) were conducted.Majority of the interviewees in Goa were from medium priced restaurants (48.4%) followed by high (21.8%)and low (14%) priced restaurants.For consistency, responses for all questions are presented as a percentage of total interviews unless specified otherwise.

| Species
Majority (82%) of the interviewees did not distinguish elasmobranch species and preferred "baby sharks", that is, small-bodied sharks and juveniles of large-bodied sharks (Figure 3).In Goa, interviewees preferred sharks weighing 1-2 kg (32%, n = 65), followed by 5-7 kg (12%, n = 65), the latter were mainly reported as sharks with black-tipped fins and Sphyrna spp.In Chennai and Puducherry, interviewees felt diners preferred Milk shark but were unable to distinguish between the Milk shark and several similar looking species.Only interviewees in Mumbai (50%, n = 49) would buy and serve elasmobranch meat in fillets, diced or minced, whereas most other restaurants would buy and display sharks whole (with fins intact).This finding coincides with the prevalent cooking methods, as restaurants in Mumbai served a wider variety of elasmobranch meat dishes compared to other areas.

| Clientele and consumption patterns
In all cities surveyed, elasmobranch meat was primarily sold in restaurants serving regional cuisine (99%, n = 292).Interviewees explained that elasmobranch meat was a sign of "traditional" coastal cuisine, and a symbol of authenticity.Consequently, restaurants serving elasmobranchs used local language names for other seafood dishes, for example, in restaurants in Chennai and Puducherry where Sura puttu (minced shark) was served, fish curry was called Meen Kuzhambu unlike the rest of the English language menu.An interviewee from Chennai explained "Sura puttu is the most famous dish… [Other dishes] are an acquired taste that does not cater to many customers."Mori or Mushi curry and fry, as well as "Baby shark masala" were the only elasmobranch dishes in Mumbai and Thane (n = 61).These dishes were found in restaurants that served Malvani (62%), Konkani (27%), Maharashtrian (29%) or Goan (4%) cuisine.Sraavu Varutharacha curry was the name for elasmobranch meat dishes in Kerala.
In Goa, most (65%, n = 65) restaurants began serving shark meat to meet the high demand from customers, because it was "traditionally part of Goan cuisine" (18%).Shark meat was specifically ordered by customers (69%), while some Goa restaurants (17%) recommended it.The two main groups who specifically ordered shark meat dishes were locals from Goa (63%, henceforth Goans), who preferred shark Ambotik (46%, n = 44), a Goan dish, and foreign tourists (60%).The latter included tourists from Russia, United Kingdom, Germany and Israel, who preferred butter garlic shark (23%) and shark fry (22%).Interviewees believed that foreign tourists preferred shark meat for its distinct, acquired taste (58%), because it was easy to eat with soft bones (15%), was a part of their diet at home (12%), but not easily available in their home country (9%).Shark meat was not preferred by domestic tourists in Goa (15%); who were reluctant to try shark meat even when it was recommended.The classification tree analysis (CP = 0.05, R 2 = 0.72) showed that shark meat was potentially very popular during the F I G U R E 2 Prices of elasmobranch dishes in five cities as a proportion of the average price of other seafood (purple line).The numbers refer to the total number of restaurants sampled (n) in each city and color indicates the percentage of high-end restaurants.Width of each part of the violin plot indicates the relative number of restaurants with that price (y-axis) for each city.Most restaurants, except in Mumbai, were in the medium to low price range.
tourist season in Goa (November-March, Figure 4), although over one-third of interviewees (38%) felt that there was no seasonality.
Thirty five percent of Goa interviewees rated shark meat within the top six best-selling dishes, but 23% rated it unpopular.Shark dishes were ranked as both profitable (42%) and unprofitable (29%), and key informants explained that profits depended on availability and price.Whole sharks were preferred to fillets or pieces (79%).Important source markets in Goa were the Madgaon fish market (31%), Panjim Jetty (29%) and smaller local markets (22%).Only 6% of elasmobranchs came from markets in other states, including Karwar, Karnataka and Kollangodu, Kerala.Many respondents (32%) found no changes in size, abundance, consumption or price of elasmobranchs over time.A few respondents reported increased prices (18%), reduced quantity (17%), and reduced demand (6%) for elasmobranch meat over the last 10 years.

| Alternatives to elasmobranch meat
Most respondents in Goa (66%, n = 65) felt removing elasmobranchs from their menu would have no significant F I G U R E 3 A plot of the different species of sharks that interviewees report have a high demand in their restaurants.Species names are in quotes because their identity could not be verified.impact on profits.Nearly one-third of respondents (31%) were open to alternatives, such as Spanish mackerels (Scomberomorus spp.), Snappers (Lutjanus spp.) and Sea catfish (Ariidae).But 34% of respondents felt that they could not substitute shark meat, without a significant impact on their profits, because the authenticity of Goan dishes like Ambotik would be lost, and because elasmobranch meat had a unique taste (32%).Restaurants in high tourist zones stated that they would feel the financial impact of removing sharks from the menu (21.5%).
Ten restaurants in Goa had stopped serving shark meat, because it was expensive (n = 4) or had no demand (n = 4).Only 2 interviewees reported using alternative seafood instead of shark meat.The focus group discussion confirmed this, saying, "there really is no alternative for boneless shark meat."Focus group participants were mildly interested in the ecological and conservation rationale for avoiding sharks on menus but reacted most strongly to information about biomagnification of heavy metals and toxins among some high-trophic level elasmobranchs.One participant said, "…many consumers will give up shark meat consumption if they were aware of these health implications."

| DISCUSSION
We studied urban elasmobranch consumption patterns across restaurants in India, a top elasmobranch fishing nation.Below, we highlight these key findings: (1) Prevalence and availability in certain hotspots (2) the prevalence of small-bodied sharks in restaurants, (3) diverse clientele, motivations and the role of tourism in consumption, (4) effective control of India's fisheries and the market.Our findings suggest that elasmobranch meat is now being consumed by tourists, middle and upper economic classes, supporting our hypothesis (Figure 2).Consumption in restaurants alone account for potentially 10% of annual elasmobranch catch (from the model), suggesting that regulating this supply chain can easily produce significant conservation results, which may not be possible for the rest of the diffuse trade networks involving elasmobranch products.

| Hotspots of prevalence and availability
Consumption is concentrated in two states, Goa and Tamil Nadu, and in restaurants serving regional cuisines suggesting a focused conservation campaign or policy to regulate consumption in these states could have a large conservation impact.Such uneven patterns of elasmobranch consumption mirrors research findings from across Asia, Europe and South America (García Barcia et al., 2022).Tamil Nadu has long been one of the top elasmobranch fishing states in India (CMFRI, 2019).Hence, prevalence of meat consumption may be driven by historical availability of elasmobranchs in this region (Esakkimuthu et al., 2018).In contrast, elasmobranch landings in Goa relative to the total marine landings in the state have generally been lower than the national average (CMFRI, 2019; Government of Goa, 2021).Prevalence of meat consumption here may therefore reflect more recent increases in demand and consumption of elasmobranchs in this state.We did not find any restaurants in Gujarat, West Bengal and Odisha with elasmobranchs on the menu.This may be, in part, a result of the sampling design, where restaurants serving elasmobranch meat may be present in these states but simply lack an online presence.However, it also suggests that elasmobranch consumption in these regions may still be restricted to household consumption in low-income communities, which is supported by anecdotal evidence.Focused conservation campaigns or policies to regulate restaurants in these hotspots could have a large conservation impact.
F I G U R E 4 A schematic of the classification tree showing seasonality of demand for sharks in Goa, as well as the consumer profiles associated with high profits on shark meat in Goa.

| Species
With over 80% of elasmobranch species in India in the IUCN threatened categories (Dulvy et al., 2021), we find that threatened species could be disproportionately affected by local meat consumption, just as in the fin trade (Cardeñosa et al., 2022).Our study suggests that local meat consumption particularly threatens smallbodied species and juveniles of large-bodied species.The threat to juveniles could affect recruitment into reproductive age classes, enhancing the declines of these largebodied species (Kindsvater et al., 2016).Unsustainable fishing pressure would then be increasingly exerted on small-bodied species.Although small-bodied species like Spadenose sharks are generally considered to be more resilient, unrestricted exploitation can cause severe population declines (Jabado et al., 2018).This emerging threat to small-bodied elasmobranchs (such as Spadenose sharks and juvenile sharks with black-tipped fins), as seen from our study, needs careful monitoring and management to ensure sustainable use.

| Clientele and consumption patterns
Tourists (particularly foreign tourists) and middle and upper class domestic consumers are emerging consumption classes for elasmobranch meat (Figure 4).Our results (Figure 4) demonstrate different motivations for elasmobranch consumption, from cultural association with coastal cuisines, to foreign tourism.An immediate measure to curb consumption is to create a programme for restaurants to voluntarily remove sharks from their menu.The majority of restaurants in our study are agreeable to removing elasmobranchs from their menus.Restaurant owners were most concerned by the issue of heavy metal toxicity in sharks, as compared to ecological or sustainability issues.While metal toxicity has been well described in adult sharks, like Hammerhead and Blacktip sharks (García Barcia et al., 2022), small-bodied, lowtrophic level species, seen in our study, also show high heavy metal concentrations (Kim et al., 2019, who show above permissible concentrations of arsenic in small bodied sharks; Hasan et al., 2023).Hence raising restaurant and consumer awareness about the health risks from eating sharks can produce voluntary behavior changes, especially among these newly emerging consumer groups (Souza-Araujo et al., 2021).Alongside restaurants, other tourist venues like airports can be targeted for interventions to increase awareness in arriving foreign tourists.Such grassroots action could work in conjunction with policy-making on this issue over the long-term.
Certifications or labels for sustainably sourced seafood are commonly used to foster sustainable consumption, particularly in developed countries (Richter & Klöckner, 2017), and has been advocated for sharks as well (Hasan et al., 2023).Elasmobranch consumption in India can be regulated in restaurants if consumers are willing to pay a premium for sustainably sourced meat, which may be possible among middle and upper class consumers.However, this would require supply chain traceability as well as awareness and positive attitudes in consumers (Hasan et al., 2023), which are currently limited in the Indian context.Further research is needed to address these data gaps and understand if this can be a feasible conservation measure in developing countries like India.Mitigating demand from other consumers, particularly lower-income groups, might be more complex because elasmobranch meat is still cheaper than many other types of seafood (Figure 2).Raising elasmobranch meat prices through policies or taxes on local sale of elasmobranch meat may be effective in curbing consumption as long as other acceptable, sustainable and affordable protein sources are provided.However, consumption can be driven by a range of motivations beyond economic considerations (Thomas-Walters et al., 2021), as seen in our study.It is crucial that these diverse and complex motivations for elasmobranch consumption are better understood to develop tailored interventions to change consumer behavior (Veríssimo et al., 2020).

| Effective control of the fisheries and the market
Elasmobranch meat consumption also needs to be viewed in the context of overall fisheries declines.Similar to reports from Brazil (Barbosa-Filho et al., 2019), elasmobranch meat in India may supply lower economic classes with protein because other seafood has become scarcer and more expensive.Hence, elasmobranchs are increasingly retained in catches from indirect fisheries (Karnad et al., 2020).To curb unsustainable fisheries and overall fisheries declines, India needs to implement policies to curb the use and sale of illegal and nonselective fishing gear.Simultaneously, the consumption of other edible seafood species that are not threatened by extinction, such as a shift to less eaten teleost fish, can be promoted (e.g., the work of InSeason Fish detailed in Karnad et al., 2021).As blanket bans on shark fishing have been previously unsuccessful in India (Hausfather, 2004), a focus on better fisheries monitoring and enforcement is required.Specifically, requiring the use of Vessel Monitoring Systems on all fishing vessels will allow for better surveillance of fisheries that target elasmobranchs.Further, India's National Policy on Marine Fisheries (GoI, 2017) and Blue Economy Policies (GoI, 2020) need provisions to require the use of bycatch reduction devices, more stringent rules for licensing of fishing vessels and the introduction of economic incentives for fishers to exit unsustainable fisheries.However, low levels of fisheries policy compliance in India (Karnad et al., 2014) suggests that in order to be effective, policy changes need to be mirrored within community institutions which are shown to be effective at the local level (Karnad, 2017 in Maharashtra).Regulations set by formal and informal fisher institutions, particularly when supported by responsible local markets for sustainable seafood have been successful at achieving conservation goals (Karnad et al., 2021).For instance, in Goa, where evidence of a targeted seasonal shark fishery supplying local consumers exists (Gupta et al., 2023), conservation strategy can focus on mitigation by applying appropriate financial or social incentives to prevent fishing during that period (Booth et al., 2023).Although financial incentives and high levels of monitoring and enforcement might work out to be too expensive in the long term, anecdotal evidence suggests that social incentives could prove to be more effective.

| CONCLUSION
Our study indicates that restaurants form an important component in domestic supply chains for elasmobranch meat in India.We also confirm previous research from India, which suggested that domestic elasmobranch meat consumption is a significant driver of bycatch fisheries (Karnad et al., 2020).Policy interventions need to improve the health of the marine fisheries as a whole, in addition to specific interventions to make elasmobranch meat less affordable and less accessible at restaurants.Holistic policies on fisheries, wildlife, domestic markets and taxes are the need of the hour to tackle the multiplicity of elasmobranch products that are now traded.More research is needed to fill key lacunae in our understanding of the drivers of elasmobranch fishing.For instance, there is no data on household elasmobranch consumption, nor on the role of local markets in fuelling the trade in elasmobranch meat.Traceability and transparency of supply chains, from capture to consumption, is important to stop unregulated trade and to keep elasmobranch populations sustainable (Niedermüller et al., 2021).

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Divya Karnad and Y. Chaitanya Krishna devised the idea, approach, methodology and fund-raised for this project.Divya Karnad, Narayani S, Shruthi Kottillil, Sudha Kottillil, Trisha Gupta, Alissa Barnes and Andrew Dias contributed to data collection.Divya Karnad, Narayani S, Shruthi Kottillil, Sudha Kottillil and Trisha Gupta contributed to data analysis.All authors contributed to writing the paper.

F
I G U R E 1 A map of the study area showing cities surveyed and states with highest availability on restaurant menus in black, high availability in shades of red, medium to low availability in yellow and blue and no availability in white.
Search terms, databases used to identify restaurants with online menus and categories used to classify the data.