Elasmobranchs (sharks, skates and rays) possess a sophisticated array of sensory systems that are, undoubtedly, of great importance to their survival. Representing the earliest group of extant jawed vertebrates, detailed study of elasmobranch sensory biology can provide much-needed information on the evolution of vertebrate sensory systems. Some sensory modalities have been studied in detail in several species, but few studies have examined and compared multiple sensory systems within a particular genus. By examining the morphology and physiology of the different sensory systems, correlations can be made within both an ecological and a phylogenetic context. The primary advantage of studying the sensory systems of closely related species is that any differences between them are more likely to reflect functional ecological adaptations rather than the effects of phylogenetic separation. Wobbegongs sharks (Orectolobidae) are a distinctive group of benthic sharks that are characterised by a highly patterned, dorso-ventrally compressed body. Wobbegongs are ambush predators that employ a unique ‘sit and wait’ strategy. Their morphologically distinct body shape, sedentary lifestyle and mode of predation suggest that wobbegong sharks may differ from other elasmobranchs in how they employ their different sensory systems. In this study, four wobbegong species that vary in life-history and/or habitat were examined: the Western wobbegong, Orectolobus hutchinsi, the spotted wobbegong, O. maculatus, the ornate wobbegong, O. ornatus and the dwarf spotted wobbegong, O. parvimaculatus. Vision and olfaction were assessed in all four species. Detailed assessment of electroreception and mechanoreception (lateral line) was conducted only for O. maculatus and O. ornatus. Morphology, physiology and molecular genetics were examined in the visual system, and morphological assessment was conducted for the olfactory, electroreceptive and mechanosensory lateral line systems. The retinae of all four wobbegong species are duplex; rod and cone photoreceptors can be distinguished easily on the basis of morphology. The wavelength of maximum absorbance (λmax) of the rod visual pigment is 496 nm in O. hutchinsi, 484 nm in O. maculatus, 498 nm in O. ornatus and 494 nm in O. parvimaculatus. Absorbance spectra of cone visual pigments were only obtained from O. maculatus and O. ornatus. Only one spectral type of cone was measured in each species, with max values at 553 nm and 560 nm, respectively. Partial sequences were obtained for the rh1 opsin gene in all four species, and for the lws opsin gene in every species except O. parvimaculatus. The apparent presence of only one cone pigment raises the possibility that wobbegongs do not have colour vision. The topographic distribution of cells within the ganglion cell layer of Orectolobus hutchinsi show a weakly elongated central visual streak of increased cell density, mediating a higher spatial resolving power of 2.06 cycles deg-1 in the frontal visual field. Retinal topography of O. maculatus and O. parvimaculatus are similar, with both possessing a dorsal horizontal streak facilitating increased spatial resolving power in the lower visual field. Orectolobus parvimaculatus also possesses an area of increased cell density in the naso-ventral region of the retina mediating acute vision in the upper caudal region of the visual field. Spatial resolving power reaches 3.51 cycles deg-1 and 3.91 cycles deg-1 in O. maculatus and O. parvimaculatus, respectively. The topographical variation in retinal sampling indicates that different regions of the visual field are relatively more important and may reflect interspecific differences in behaviour and habitat. The mean number of lamellae in the olfactory rosette is 47.0 for Orectolobus hutchinsi, 48.7 for O. maculatus, 40.7 for O. ornatus and 55.7 for O. parvimaculatus. Olfactory sensory epithelial surface area is comparable in O. hutchinsi, O. maculatus and O. ornatus, while O. parvimaculatus has a significantly larger surface area, relative to body size, compared to the other three species. Olfaction appears to be relatively more important in O. parvimaculatus, especially during low light conditions, when vision is limited. The distribution of ampullary electroreceptive pores and mechanosensory lateral line pores (pored and non-pored canals) is almost entirely concentrated on the dorsal region of the head in both O. maculatus and O. ornatus. This suggests that both sensory systems are well-adapted and specialised to detect prey swimming overhead when the wobbegong is sitting motionless, thereby facilitating its unique, predatory, “lie-in-wait’ ambush strategy. Orectolobus hutchinsi and O. ornatus appear to be well-suited to both diurnal and nocturnal activities, whereas O. maculatus and O. parvimaculatus are probably most active under low light conditions. Sensory system information inferred from this study correlates well with what is known of the diet and habitat of the four wobbegong species examined. Therefore, in the absence of other biological data, sensory neurobiological approaches can be used to predict such bio-ecological factors as predatory strategy, habitat preference, and behaviour. Electrophysiology and behavioural approaches will provide major advances in future studies in order to understand how each of the different senses is integrated at both peripheral and central levels and how such studies are vital to our understanding of evolutionary and ecological processes.