DOCSLIB.ORG

Toward a Synthetic Acoustic Ecology: Sonically Situated, Evolutionary Agent Based Models of the Acoustic Niche Hypothesis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Toward a Synthetic Acoustic Ecology: Sonically Situated, Evolutionary Agent Based Models of the Acoustic Niche Hypothesis Toward a Synthetic Acoustic Ecology: Sonically Situated, Evolutionary Agent Based Models of the Acoustic Niche Hypothesis Alice Eldridge1;2 and Chris Kiefer1 1Emute Lab, Department of Music, University of Sussex, UK 2Peck Labs, Evolution, Behaviour & Environment, University of Sussex, UK [email protected] Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/isal/proceedings-pdf/alife2018/30/296/1904972/isal_a_00059.pdf by guest on 26 September 2021 Abstract creature choruses as more powerful, informative narratives in soundscape composition (Monacchi, 2013; Barclay and We introduce the idea of Synthetic Acoustic Ecology (SAC) as Gifford, 2018). However, there is a paucity of coherent the- a vehicle for transdisciplinary investigation to develop meth- ory addressing the ecological significance of global sound- ods and address open theoretical, applied and aesthetic ques- scapes, lack of effective computational tools for ecological tions in scientific and artistic disciplines of acoustic ecology. Ecoacoustics is an emerging science that investigates and in- monitoring (Sueur et al., 2008) and many latent creative terprets the ecological role of sound. It draws conceptually applications, for example in musical composition or game from, and is reinvigorating the related arts-humanities dis- world design. Just as Alife modelling has potential to medi- ciplines historically associated with acoustic ecology, which ate theoretical and empirical biology (Wheeler et al., 2002), are concerned with sonically-mediated relationships between we propose that a sonically situated flavour of Alife, which human beings and their environments. Both study the acous- tic environment, or soundscape, as the literal and concep- we call Synthetic Acoustic Ecology (SAC), may be a produc- tual site of interaction of human and non-human organisms. tive vehicle for investigation and a nexus of exchange be- However, no coherent theories exist to frame the ecological tween science, art and technological facets of acoustic ecol- role of the soundscape, or to elucidate the evolutionary pro- ogy in advancing our appreciation of soundscape as an inter- cesses through which it is structured. Similarly there is a lack face of human and natural systems which both reflects and of appropriate computational methods to analyse the macro soundscape which hampers application in conservation. We affects our coupled environments. propose that a sonically situated flavour of Alife evolutionary agent-based model could build a productive bridge between Soundscape, Ecoacoustics and Acoustic Ecology the art, science and technologies of acoustic ecological in- vestigations to the benefit of all. As a first step, two simple The term ‘soundscape’ has been used by a variety of disci- models of the acoustic niche hypothesis are presented which plines to describe the relationship between a landscape and are shown to exhibit emergence of complex spectro-temporal soundscape structures and adaptation to and recovery from the composition of its sound in both real and virtual worlds noise pollution events. We discuss the potential of SAC as a (Grimshaw and Schott, 2007). Originally coined in the con- lingua franca between empirical and theoretical ecoacoustics, text of urban design (Southworth, 1967) Soundscape was and wider transdisciplinary research in ecoacoustic ecology. later used by a group of environmentally-aware radio artists and sonic sociologists to describe ‘the acoustical characteris- tics of an area that reflect natural processes’ (Schafer, 1977). Introduction The scientific discipline of soundscape ecology recently pro- There is increasing interest across ecological science (Pi- posed a framework to investigate soundscape in terms of janowski et al., 2011; Sueur and Farina, 2015), arts (Bar- the causes and consequences of biological (biophony), geo- clay and Gifford, 2018; Monacchi and Krause, 2017; Mc- physical (geophony), and human-produced (anthrophony) Cormack et al., 2009) and humanities (Turner et al., 2003) sounds that emanate from a landscape (Pijanowski et al., in listening to, recording, investigating and interpreting the 2011). The emerging interdisciplinary science of Ecoa- acoustic environment - or soundscape - as the interface of coustics subsumes both soundscape ecology and bioacous- human and natural systems. If bioacoustics can be charac- tics (Sueur and Farina, 2015) to study the ecological role of terised as the study of the isolated duets of vocalising crit- sound. There is a growing impetus to develop acoustic ecol- ters, then the nascent field science of ecoacoustics is con- ogy as a truly interdisciplinary endeavour (Barclay and Gif- cerned with investigating and interpreting the ecological rel- ford, 2018), bridging traditional disciplinary divides. This is evance of the strains of full orchestra. A similar shift is ev- where we position Synthetic Acoustic Ecology. ident in the arts as representation in field recordings and Whereas bioacoustics infers behavioural information music has broadened from individual voices to collective from intra- and interspecific signals, ecoacoustics inves- tigates the ecological role of sound at higher ecological and evolutionary organisational units - from population and community up to landscape scales. Sound is understood as a core ecological component (resource) and ipso facto, due to structuring by competition, an indicator of ecological sta- tus (source of information). The field has been substantially bolstered by the increasing availability and decreasing costs of automated recording devices (Acevedo and Villanueva- Rivera, 2006; Farina et al., 2018), cheap storage and de- velopments in acoustic data processing (Truskinger et al., 2014). However, whilst it has drawn from theories of related ecological disciplines including bioacoustics, and landscape ecology (Turner et al., 2001), there is an absence of coher- ent theory regarding the ecological significance of the macro Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/isal/proceedings-pdf/alife2018/30/296/1904972/isal_a_00059.pdf by guest on 26 September 2021 soundscape. This not only constrains theoretical advances, but hampers potential applications such as environmental monitoring and prediction. Ecoacoustics is born of Bioa- coustic Big Data, but lacks coherent theories and computa- tional tools for effective development and application. Figure 1: Spectrogram (0 − 22:5 kHz) of a field record- Acoustic Niche Hypothesis ing made in the Ecuadorian amazon showing inter-taxon fre- Three hypotheses underpin ecoacoustics. The morphologi- quency partitioning of the acoustic environment. The vocal- cal adaptation hypothesis (MAH) and the acoustic adapta- isations of each taxa are bandlimited, minimising frequency tion hypothesis (AAH) are borrowed by bioacoustics and overlap between species; quasi temporal partitioning can describe how signals evolve through ecological feedback; also be observed in anuran species, although it is not clear the acoustic niche hypothesis is core to ecoacoustics (and here if this is conspecific or heterospecific. is also the hardest to evaluate) and describes the evolution of soundscape complexity. The MAH focuses on the ‘sender’ and hypothesises that the embodied form (body size, trachea less-disturbed habitats with unaltered species assemblages length, beak shape etc.) will shape potential range of signals will exhibit higher levels of coordination between inter- (Bennet-Clark, 1998). The AAH (Morton, 1975) predicts specific vocalizations than more heavily disturbed habitats, that acoustic properties of an environment can influence the where species assemblages are in rapid flux. Likewise, inva- evolution of vocalizations in certain species. sive species could create biophonic disturbances, thereby al- In his formulation of the ANH, musician-turned bioacous- tering natural acoustic partitioning (Pijanowski et al., 2011). tician Bernie Krause pointed out that both morphological This implies that if we listen in the right way we can hear and behavioural adaptations can also be triggered by inter- the health of an ecosystem. specific interference when organisms’ calls contain similar ANH is foundational to ecoacoustic theory and has ma- frequency and timing features (Krause, 1993). The ANH jor implications for ecological monitoring and prediction, was proposed after observation of complex arrangements of however empirical validation and development of applica- non-overlapping signals in recordings of soundscapes across tion is hard: firstly because it is not clear exactly what it multiple habitats. Krause postulated that this could be ex- means for a soundscape to exhibit ‘higher levels of coordina- plained by evolutionary pressure to minimize spectral or tion’; secondly because measurement of ecological integrity temporal overlaps in interspecific vocalizations. The ANH and even biodiversity remains contentious (Hillebrand et al., expands Hutchinson’s ecological niche concept (Hutchin- 2018); thirdly we lack appropriate computational meth- son, 1957) by adding a sonic dimension to evolutionary ods for community-level machine listening (Eldridge et al., ecospace. That vocalising species partition acoustic space 2016). Whilst research into bioacoustically motivated ma- to minimise interference from sympatric species has long chine listening algorithms for automated species detection is been recognised (Duellman and Pyles, 1983) in bioacous- well developed (e.g. Stowell and Plumbley (2014)), commu- tics. As illustrated in Figure 1, frequency partitioning across nity level indices
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Acoustic Tagging of Large Sharks – Potential for Acoustic Interference
    CITIZEN SCIENCE – CS 05-11-17) Acoustic tagging of large sharks – Potential for acoustic interference (CS 05-11-17) – Kim Allen independent researcher Citizen science overview This paper is one of a series of unfunded, independent research initiatives that question mainstream science, Animal ethics approaches and Governments’ apparent acceptance of “Validated” science in the area of wildlife electronic tracking. Clearly, the Australian shark issue is extremely contentious as well as political and emotionally charged. Over $100 million has been expended by State and Federal governments in an attempt to find answers and make our beaches safer. Unfortunately, at no stage has a strategic approach been taken to identify the key disciplines of science that need to be considered, assessed, and applied. Significant investment has been directed into the construction and support of wide-scale acoustic receiver arrays and individual sensors as well as significant tagging of large sharks off our coastline for research and public safety. Previous satellite archival tagging programs conducted by CSIRO gave us good insight into shark movements, however since this time despite significant investment minimal progress appears to have been made and the potential risks appear to have been ignored. This CSIRO document clearly outlines the types of tags that are used for shark research, it also clearly defines the recommended protocols that should be used for shark tagging operations. From photographic details shared in the public domain it is clear that shark tagging operations undertaken by Fisheries departments don’t follow these stringent protocols. (www.cmar.csiro.au/e-print/open/2009/bradfordrw a.pdf ) It is extremely difficult for “Unqualified” Citizen scientists to challenge mainstream research particularly given the potential erosion of future funding sources if technical criticism is determined as valid.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 86, No. 75/Wednesday, April 21, 2021
    21082 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Network, and the Wishtoyo Foundation Manning, NMFS, Office of Protected filed a complaint seeking court-ordered National Oceanic and Atmospheric Resources, 301–427–8466. deadlines for the issuance of proposed Administration SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and final rules to designate critical habitat for the CAM, MX, and WNP 50 CFR Parts 223, 224, and 226 Background DPSs of humpback whales. See Center Under the ESA, we are responsible for for Biological Diversity et al. v. National [Docket No. 210415–0080] determining whether certain species are Marine Fisheries Service, et al., No. threatened or endangered, and, to the 3:18–cv–01628–EDL (N.D. Cal.). The RIN 0648–BI06 maximum extent prudent and parties entered into a settlement determinable, designating critical agreement with the approval and Endangered and Threatened Wildlife habitat for endangered and threatened oversight of the court, and subsequently and Plants: Designating Critical species at the time of listing (16 U.S.C. amended the dates specified in the Habitat for the Central America, 1533(a)(3)(A)(i)). On September 8, 2016, original order. The amended settlement Mexico, and Western North Pacific we published a final rule that revised agreement stipulated that NMFS submit Distinct Population Segments of the listing of humpback whales under a proposed determination concerning Humpback Whales the ESA by removing the original, the designation of critical habitat for taxonomic-level species listing, and in these three DPSs to the Federal Register AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries its place listing four DPSs as endangered by September 26, 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • 0251 AES Behavior & Ecology, 552 AB, Friday 9 July 2010 Jeff
    0251 AES Behavior & Ecology, 552 AB, Friday 9 July 2010 Jeff Kneebone1, Gregory Skomal2, John Chisholm2 1University of Massachusetts Dartmouth; School for Marine Science and Technology, New Bedford, Massachusetts, United States, 2Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, New Bedford, Massachusetts, United States Spatial and Temporal Habitat Use and Movement Patterns of Neonatal and Juvenile Sand Tiger Sharks, Carcharias taurus, in a Massachusetts Estuary In recent years, an increasing number of neonate and juvenile sand tiger sharks (Carcharias taurus) have been incidentally taken by fishermen in Plymouth, Kingston, Duxbury (PKD) Bay, a 10,200 acre tidal estuary located on the south shore of Massachusetts. There are indications that the strong seasonal presence (late spring to early fall) of sand tigers in this area is a relatively new phenomenon as local fishermen claim that they had never seen this species in large numbers until recently. We utilized passive acoustic telemetry to monitor seasonal residency, habitat use, site fidelity, and fine scale movements of 35 sand tigers (79 – 120 cm fork length; age 0 - 1) in PKD Bay. Sharks were tracked within PKD Bay for periods of 5 – 88 days during September – October, 2008 and June – October, 2009. All movement data are currently being analyzed to quantify spatial and temporal habitat use, however, preliminary analyses suggest that sharks display a high degree of site fidelity to several areas of PKD Bay. Outside PKD Bay, we documented broader regional movements throughout New England. Collectively, these data demonstrate the that both PKD Bay and New England coastal waters serve as nursery and essential fish habitat (EFH) for neonatal and juvenile sand tiger sharks.
    [Show full text]
  • AJ3 – M Fournet, Karpowership Marine Acoustic Ecology Expert Input
    "AJ3" JUDICIAL REVIEW – ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION FOR THREE PROPOSED GAS TO POWER POWERSHIP PROJECTS LED BY KARPOWERSHIP SA (PTY) LTD – MARINE ACOUSTIC ECOLOGY EXPERT INPUT Michelle Fournet, M.S., PhD OVERVIEW: This report contains an expert opinion assessing the scientific soundness of activities relating to three Gas to Power - Powership Projects led by Karpowership SA (PTY) Ltd. The proposed project locations include: (1) Port of Ngqura (on the Southeastern side of South Africa), (2) Richards Bay (near Durban), and (3) in Saldanha Bay (near Cape Town on the West Coast of South Africa). The projects involve the generation of electricity by means of mobile Powerships to be berthed in the marine environment. Additional components of the projects include Floating Storage Regasification Units (FSRU), gas pipelines, and a Liquid Natural GasCarrier (LNGC), which will all interact with marine ecosystems. Specifically, this report is concerned with whether the marine ecology assessments and noise impact assessments (hereafter ‘the studies’) and the associated environmental impact assessment reports (EIAs) adequately assessed the environmental impact of anthropogenic noise and vibrations associated with the proposed projects and associated activities. Noise and vibrations will be broadly addressed, with specific emphasis on suitability of the EIAs to address impacts to the marine environment. These projects collectively rely on a single technical study to predict possible noise levels emanating from the powership, repeat language and mitigation strategies, and rely on the same scientific and technical references. As such, this report will address the three independent EIAs and the associated studies collectively, noting differences in the ecology of the three regions as needed, since site specific assessments of marine noise impacts were omitted from all three EIAs and associated studies.
    [Show full text]
  • River Listening: Acoustic Ecology
    RIVER LISTENING: ACOUSTIC ECOLOGY adopts an acoustic ecology approach by exploring acoustic AND AQUATIC BIOACOUSTICS IN GLOBAL patterns from a holistic perspective that incorporates the physi- RIVER SYSTEMS cal habitat of the river ecosystem [4]. Leah Barclay, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia. The scientific grounding for River Listening is led by fresh- Email: <[email protected]>. water ecologist Dr Simon Linke. Dr Linke’s pioneering work in biomonitoring and river conservation planning has been Toby Gifford, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia. used by agencies and NGOs from South East Queensland to Email: <[email protected]>. the Congo and he has recently been investigating aquatic bioa- Simon Linke, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia. coustics and real-time ecosystem monitoring in freshwater Email <[email protected]>. environments using passive acoustics. Dr Linke believes that classic techniques for measuring aquatic biodiversity are prob- See <mitpressjournals.org/toc/leon/51/3> for supplemental files associated lematic as they potentially injure the study organism (such as with this issue. electrofishing) and can be bias as they only provide a brief balance-unbalance 2015–2016, part 2 Submitted: 21 October 2016 snapshot at the time of observation. He believes that passive Abstract acoustics presents a noninvasive and unexplored approach to River Listening is an interdisciplinary research project exploring the freshwater ecosystem monitoring. This theory is shared by Dr cultural and biological diversity of global river systems through Toby Gifford, the third collaborator on River Listening who is sound. The project examines the creative possibilities of accessible a music technologist and software programmer active in a wide and noninvasive recording technologies to monitor river health and engage local communities in the conservation of global river systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring the Ocean Through Sound
    Exploring the Ocean through Sound Jennifer L. Miksis-Olds School of Marine Science & Ocean Engineering, University of New Hampshire Bruce Martin Department of Oceanography, Dalhousie University Abstract Sound is an important sensory modality in the lives of many marine organisms, as sound travels faster and farther than any other sensory signal. Consequently, marine animals ranging from the smallest larvae to the largest whales have evolved mechanisms for both producing and receiving acoustic signals. Innovation in underwater recording technology now permits the remote monitoring of vocalizing animals and the environment without the need to rely on human observers, the physical presence of an ocean observation vessel, or adequate visibility and sampling conditions. Passive acoustic monitoring is an efficient, non- invasive, and relatively low-cost alternative to hands-on exploration that is providing a wealth of information on regional sound sources (biologic, anthropogenic, geophysical), animal behavior, ecosystem dynamics, biodiversity, and impacts of human activity Key Words Soundscape, ambient sound, soundscape ecology, orientation, biodiversity The average depth of the ocean is 4000 m. Light only penetrates the first 100 m, yet life abounds below this photic zone. Marine life establish homes, find food, socialize, mate, and raise young while avoiding predators, all without light. Ocean water is approximately 1000 times denser than air resulting in ocean sound speeds that are approximately five times 1 higher than in air with much
    [Show full text]
  • Dean Jacqueline E. Dixon Annual Report for The
    DEAN JACQUELINE E. DIXON ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE COLLEGE OF MARINE SCIENCE JANUARY 1 – DECEMBER 31, 2013 Locally Applied, Regionally Relevant, Globally Significant! TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents The View from the Bridge ________________________________________________________________________________1 Faculty Highlights _________________________________________________________________________________________4 Facilities ___________________________________________________________________________________________________6 Research ___________________________________________________________________________________________________7 CMS Ocean Technology (COT) Group __________________________________________________________________ 16 C-IMAGE: Our Featured Research Project _____________________________________________________________ 20 Graduate Education and Awards_______________________________________________________________________ 23 Education & Outreach __________________________________________________________________________________ 30 Development ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 33 Events ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 35 Publications _____________________________________________________________________________________________ 37 Active Research Awards ________________________________________________________________________________ 49 THE VIEW FROM THE BRIDGE The View from the Bridge Healthy oceans are more important
    [Show full text]
  • Toward a Synthetic Acoustic Ecology: Sonically Situated, Evolutionary Agent Based Models of the Acoustic Niche Hypothesis
    Toward a Synthetic Acoustic Ecology: Sonically Situated, Evolutionary Agent Based Models of the Acoustic Niche Hypothesis Alice Eldridge1;2 and Chris Kiefer1 1Emute Lab, Department of Music, University of Sussex, UK 2Peck Labs, Evolution, Behaviour & Environment, University of Sussex, UK [email protected] Abstract lective creature choruses as more powerful, informative nar- ratives in soundscape composition (Monacchi, 2013; Bar- We introduce the idea of Synthetic Acoustic Ecology (SAC) as clay and Gifford, 2018). However, there is a paucity of co- a vehicle for transdisciplinary investigation to develop meth- herent theory addressing the ecological significance of the ods and address open theoretical, applied and aesthetic ques- global soundscape, lack of effective computational tools for tions in scientific and artistic disciplines of acoustic ecology. Ecoacoustics is an emerging science that investigates and in- ecological monitoring (Sueur et al., 2008) and many latent terprets the ecological role of sound. It draws conceptually creative applications, for example in musical composition or from, and is reinvigorating the related arts-humanities dis- game world design. Just as Alife modelling has potential to ciplines historically associated with acoustic ecology, which mediate theoretical and empirical biology (Wheeler et al., are concerned with sonically-mediated relationships between 2002), we propose that a sonically situated flavour of Alife, human beings and their environments. Both study the acous- tic environment, or soundscape, as the literal and concep- which we call Synthetic Acoustic Ecology (SAC), may be a tual site of interaction of human and non-human organisms. productive vehicle for investigation and a nexus of exchange However, no coherent theories exist to frame the ecological between the scientific, artistic and technological facets of role of the soundscape, or to elucidate the evolutionary pro- acoustic ecology.
    [Show full text]
  • The Art and Science of Acoustic Ecology
    AUDIOLOGY FEATURE The art and science of acoustic ecology BY AKI PASOULAS Aki Pasoulas summarises the diverse forms and approaches of the relatively new and expanding area of acoustic ecology, a discipline that studies the relationship between living beings and their sonic environment. ound Ecology emerged in the late 1960s through the work founding members teamed up with representatives of the worldwide of R Murray Schafer and his colleagues at Simon Fraser acoustic ecology community to form the World Forum for Acoustic University in Vancouver, Canada. ‘Soundscape ecology’ is Ecology (WFAE) in 1993. WFAE currently has a number of affiliated Sanother term which is sometimes used interchangeably organisations around the world, with a mission to collaborate with ‘acoustic ecology’. Both scientists and artists have embraced and promote among other related issues: aural awareness and this field in order to understand more about our sonic environment understanding of sound environments; social, cultural, scientific and try to improve it, as well as draw inspiration from and raise and ecological aspects of soundscapes; preservation of natural awareness about its current and ever-changing state. soundscapes and times/places of quiet; and creation of healthy and acoustically balanced sonic environments [2]. Background – a short history of acoustic ecology R Murray Schafer started his career as a composer and music Acoustic ecology research educator. From early on, his attention was drawn towards noise Scholars working in this field introduced useful terms and pollution and the lack of awareness people had of their acoustic taxonomies to classify our surrounding sound environments. Schafer environments. After an initial research period, Schafer established proposed the term ‘hi-fi’ to describe soundscapes where all sounds the World Soundscape Project (WSP) in 1971, as an educational and can be heard clearly, each occupying its own separate acoustic space, research group to concentrate on aural perception, soundscapes much like instruments in a classical orchestra.
    [Show full text]
  • Deep-Diving Cetaceans of the Gulf of Mexico: Acoustic Ecology and Response to Natural and Anthropogenic Forces Including the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Deep-Diving Cetaceans of the Gulf of Mexico: Acoustic Ecology and Response to Natural and Anthropogenic Forces Including the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Adissertationsubmittedinpartialsatisfactionofthe requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Oceanography by Karlina Paul Merkens Committee in charge: John Hildebrand, Chair Jay Barlow Phil Hastings William Hodgkiss James Neih 2013 Copyright Karlina Paul Merkens, 2013 All rights reserved. The dissertation of Karlina Paul Merkens is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: Chair University of California, San Diego 2013 iii DEDICATION To Lillian Irene, my inspiration, motivation, and the apple of my eye. And to Michael, today, tomorrow, and forever. iv EPIGRAPH I must go down to the seas again, to the lonely sea and the sky, And all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by, And the wheel’s kick and the wind’s song and the white sail’s shaking, And a grey mist on the sea’s face, and a grey dawn breaking. I must go down to the seas again, for the call of the running tide Is a wild call and a clear call that may not be denied; And all I ask is a windy day with the white clouds flying, And the flung spray and the blown spume, and the sea-gulls crying. I must go down to the seas again, to the vagrant gypsy life, To the gull’s way and the whale’s way, where the wind’s like a whetted knife; And all I ask is a merry yarn from a laughing fellow-rover, And quiet sleep and a sweet dream when the long trick’s over.
    [Show full text]
  • Underwater Soundscape Monitoring and Fish Bioacoustics: a Review
    fishes Review Underwater Soundscape Monitoring and Fish Bioacoustics: A Review Adelaide V. Lindseth * and Phillip S. Lobel * Department of Biology, Boston University, 5 Cummington Mall, Boston, MA 02215, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] (A.V.L.); [email protected] (P.S.L.); Tel.: +1-617-358-4586 (P.S.L.) Received: 10 August 2018; Accepted: 6 September 2018; Published: 12 September 2018 Abstract: Soundscape ecology is a rapidly growing field with approximately 93% of all scientific articles on this topic having been published since 2010 (total about 610 publications since 1985). Current acoustic technology is also advancing rapidly, enabling new devices with voluminous data storage and automatic signal detection to define sounds. Future uses of passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) include biodiversity assessments, monitoring habitat health, and locating spawning fishes. This paper provides a review of ambient sound and soundscape ecology, fish acoustic monitoring, current recording and sampling methods used in long-term PAM, and parameters/metrics used in acoustic data analysis. Keywords: underwater sound; passive acoustic detection; acoustic monitoring; fish; ambient noise; environmental monitoring; coral reef 1. Introduction Soundscape ecology is an emerging field of research [1,2] (Figure1). The basis for this new field is the concept that measurements of the acoustic ambiance could potentially convey important information about a habitat and its biological condition, such as species presence, species spawning patterns, environmental conditions, and habitat quality [3]. Coral reef habitats were once thought to be in a “silent sea”, but have now been revealed as “choral reefs” based on using new acoustic technologies [4]. Ship and other man-made noises in the oceans have increased drastically over the past few decades and have raised concerns about interference with animal behavior, such as masking animal communication or impeding larval settlement [5–11].
    [Show full text]
  • Seasonal Acoustic Environments of Beluga and Bowhead Whale Core-Use Regions in the Pacific Arctic ⁎ Kathleen M
    Deep-Sea Research Part II xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Deep-Sea Research Part II journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/dsr2 Seasonal acoustic environments of beluga and bowhead whale core-use regions in the Pacific Arctic ⁎ Kathleen M. Stafforda, , Manuel Castelloteb,c, Melania Guerraa, Catherine L. Berchokc a Applied Physics Laboratory, University of Washington, 1013 NE 40th St, Seattle, WA 98105, USA b JISAO, University of Washington, 3737 Brooklyn Ave, Seattle, WA 98105, USA c Marine Mammal Laboratory, Alaska Fisheries Science Center, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115, USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: The acoustic environment of two focal Arctic species, bowhead (Balaena mysticetus) and beluga (Delphinapterus Arctic zone leucas) whales, varied among the three core-use regions of the Pacific Arctic examined during the months in Ambient noise which both species occur: (1) January-March in the St. Lawrence Island/Anadyr Strait region, (2) November- Bowhead whale January in the Bering Strait region, and (3) August-October in the Barrow Canyon region. Biological noise Balaena mysticetus (consisting of the signals of bowhead whales, walrus and bearded seals) dominated the acoustic environment for Beluga whale the focal species in the St. Lawrence Island/Anadyr Strait region, which was covered with ice throughout the Delphinapterus leucas months studied. In the Bering Strait region whales were exposed primarily to environmental noise (in the form of wind noise) during November, before the region was ice-covered in December, and biological noise (from bowhead and walrus) again was prevalent. Anthropogenic noise dominated the Barrow Canyon region for the focal species in late summer and fall (August through October); this was also the only region in which the two species did not overlap with sea ice.
    [Show full text]