DOCSLIB.ORG

Impacts of Environment-Dependent Acoustic Propagation on Passive Acoustic Monitoring of Cetaceans

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Impacts of Environment-Dependent Acoustic Propagation on Passive Acoustic Monitoring of Cetaceans IMPACTS OF ENVIRONMENT-DEPENDENT ACOUSTIC PROPAGATION ON PASSIVE ACOUSTIC MONITORING OF CETACEANS by Carolyn M. Binder Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Dalhousie University Halifax, Nova Scotia July 2017 DRDC-RDDC-2017-P060 c Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Minister of National Defence, 2017 For my family. I couldn’t have done this without your support, dedication, and love. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ..................................... vii List of Figures .................................... ix Abstract ........................................ xiv List of Abbreviations and Symbols Used ...................... xv Acknowledgements ................................. xix Chapter 1 Introduction ............................ 1 1.1 Literature Review .............................. 1 1.2 Investigating the Impacts of Environment- Dependent Propagation on an Automated Aural Classifier ......................... 4 1.2.1 Thesis Outline ........................... 6 Chapter 2 Automated Aural Classifier and Performance Metrics ..... 8 2.1 The Aural Classifier ............................. 9 2.1.1 Validation of Classifier Performance ............... 10 2.2 Performance Metrics ............................ 13 Chapter 3 Biogenic and Synthetic Vocalization Data Set .......... 18 3.1 Biogenic Whale Calls ............................ 18 3.2 Synthetic Whale Calls ............................ 21 3.2.1 Comparison of Synthetic Calls with Biogenic Whale Calls .... 23 3.3 Conditioning and Upsampling of Signals for Experiments ......... 27 3.3.1 Time Series for Transmission ................... 31 3.4 Signal Detection ............................... 31 Chapter 4 Propagation Experiments ..................... 33 4.1 Introduction ................................. 33 4.2 Experimental Set-up ............................ 34 4.2.1 Acoustic Recording Equipment .................. 38 4.3 Ocean Environment Measurements ..................... 39 iv 4.3.1 Wind Speed and Surface Roughness Conditions .......... 39 4.3.2 Ambient Noise ........................... 40 4.3.3 Sediment Properties ........................ 41 4.3.4 Sound Speed Profiles ........................ 42 4.4 Source Level Estimates ........................... 45 4.4.1 Method 1: Transmit Sensitivity and Transducer Input Voltage . 46 4.4.2 Method 2: Received Signal Level on Monitor Hydrophone .... 48 4.4.3 Source Level Results and Discussion ............... 50 4.5 Experimental Results and Discussion .................... 53 4.5.1 Example Decision Regions ..................... 54 4.5.2 Summary of Performance Results ................. 58 4.5.3 Training Set Selection ....................... 64 4.6 Chapter Summary .............................. 69 Chapter 5 Pulse Propagation Modelling ................... 71 5.1 Background ................................. 71 5.1.1 Broadband Modelling with Fourier Synthesis ........... 77 5.1.2 Waveform Transmission Through a Channel (WATTCH) Propaga- tion Model and Bellhop ...................... 79 5.2 Simulation of Experimental Conditions .................. 85 5.2.1 Environment and Model Configuration .............. 85 5.2.2 Noise Addition ........................... 87 5.2.3 Results and Discussion ....................... 91 5.3 Sensitivity to Environmental Parameters .................. 95 5.3.1 Environment and Model Configurations .............. 96 5.3.2 Results and Discussion ....................... 97 5.4 Chapter Summary ..............................101 Chapter 6 Relative Impact of SNR and Other Propagation Effects ....103 6.1 Introduction .................................103 6.2 Separating Contributions of Propagation-Induced Distortion and SNR . 105 6.2.1 Case 1: Adding Noise .......................106 6.2.2 Case 2: Adding Propagation Effects ................107 6.2.3 Case 3: Adding Noise and Propagation Effects ..........107 6.2.4 Results and Discussion .......................107 6.3 Increased Range Resolution ........................111 6.3.1 Methods ..............................111 6.3.2 Results and Discussion .......................114 6.4 Chapter Summary ..............................119 v Chapter 7 Impact of Environment-Dependent Propagation on Automatic Recognition of Bowhead and Humpback Vocalizations .....121 7.1 Environment and Model Configurations ..................122 7.1.1 Noise Addition ...........................125 7.2 Results and Discussion ...........................127 7.2.1 Isospeed Environment .......................127 7.2.2 Downward Refracting Environment ................129 7.3 Chapter Summary ..............................133 Chapter 8 Conclusions ............................135 Appendix A Mooring Diagrams .........................141 Appendix B Determination of Hydrophone Depth on SHARP Mooring ...146 B.1 Background .................................146 B.2 Determining Hydrophone Depth Via Ray Theory .............148 B.2.1 Method ...............................148 B.2.2 Results and Discussion .......................150 B.3 Determining Importance of Recorder Depth to the Aural Classifier Perfor- mance ....................................152 B.3.1 Method ...............................152 B.3.2 Results and Discussion .......................153 B.4 Summary Remarks .............................155 Appendix C Temperature-Salinity Diagrams .................156 Appendix D Arrival Structure ..........................158 D.1 Method ...................................158 D.2 Results and Discussion ...........................162 Appendix E Selection of Sediment Parameters ................164 E.1 Impact of Sediment Density on Propagation Effects and Classifier Perfor- mance ....................................166 E.2 Summary Remarks .............................167 Bibliography .....................................169 vi LIST OF TABLES 3.1 Frequency range and duration of whale vocalizations in the biogenic data set. ................................ 19 3.2 The five features that best discriminated between bowhead and humpback whale calls. ........................ 25 4.1 Depths of hydrophones deployed during both days of the Gulf of Mexico sea trial. ........................... 36 4.2 Transmission ranges of signals during the Gulf of Mexico experi- ment ................................. 38 4.3 Sampling formats for acoustic recording packages. ......... 39 4.4 Transmission loss values used for estimating the source level of transmitted signals. .......................... 51 4.5 Estimated source level of transmitted signals. ............ 52 4.6 Number of detections and classifier performance for biogenic bow- head and humpback calls recorded by the icListen on mooring 4. 54 4.7 Number of detections and classifier performance for synthetic bow- head and humpback calls recorded by the icListen on mooring 4. No uncertainty estimates are provided here for the classifier perfor- mance results because k-fold cross-validation was not implemented. 57 5.1 Summary of the main considerations when selecting a numerical technique for ocean acoustic pulse propagation modelling. ..... 76 5.2 Ranges over which signals were propagated through the WATTCH model for each of the receiver depths. ................ 87 5.3 Example performance values for signals propagated through the WATTCH model over 6.5 km through the downward refracting envi- ronment. ...............................101 B.1 Comparison of experimental and Bellhop-modelled time differences between the direct arrival, and surface and bottom reflections. 151 D.1 Comparison of the predicted and experimental delay times for the surface and bottom reflections. ....................162 vii E.1 Sediment parameters for geoacoustic modelling. ..........165 viii LIST OF FIGURES 2.1 Illustration of k-fold cross-validation ................ 12 2.2 Illustration of occurrence of positive and negative events with three example thresholds shown. ..................... 14 2.3 Confusion matrix for the two-class classification problem. ..... 15 2.4 Example ROC curves ........................ 16 2.5 Illustration of excellent accuracy and AUC, and poor accuracy but excellent AUC ............................ 17 3.1 Example spectrograms of real and synthetic bowhead and hump- back vocalizations. ......................... 20 3.2 Spectrograms of an example bowhead vocalization demonstrating the effects of signal denoising. ................... 22 3.3 Spectra of biogenic and synthetic whale vocalizations. ....... 24 3.4 Comparison of aural classifier decision regions for (a) biogenic and (b) synthetic bowhead and humpback whale vocalizations. ..... 26 3.5 Transmitting voltage response (TVR) curves for the ITC-2010 transducer and the complete amplifier and ITC-2010 transducer system ................................ 28 3.6 Spectra for full-band and bandpass filtered (a) bowhead and (b) humpback whale calls. ....................... 29 3.7 Results of training the classifier on (a) full band, and (b) bandpass filtered, biogenic bowhead and humpback vocalizations. ...... 30 4.1 (a) Map of the experimental location. (b) Map with ship tracks shown for both days of the experiment, including location of the recorders, CTD casts, and FFCPT measurements. ......... 35 4.2 Representation of the experimental setup. ............. 37 4.3 Ambient noise spectra for day 1 and day 2 of Gulf of Mexico experiment .............................. 41 4.4 Sediment type, in terms of the Robertson zone, obtained from Freefall Cone Penetrometer measurements. ............. 42 ix 4.5 Sound speed profiles observed (a)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Acoustic Monitoring of Beluga Whale Interactions with Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project De-Ee0002657
    < U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ACOUSTIC MONITORING OF BELUGA WHALE INTERACTIONS WITH COOK INLET TIDAL ENERGY PROJECT DE-EE0002657 FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT February 5, 2014 ORPC Alaska, LLC 725 Christensen Dr., Suite 6 Anchorage, AK 99501 Phone (207) 772-7707 www.orpc.co ORPC Alaska, LLC: DE-EE0002657 Acoustic Monitoring of Beluga Whale Interactions with Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project February 5, 2014 Award Number: DE-EE0002657 Recipient: ORPC Alaska, LLC Project Title: Acoustic Monitoring of Beluga Whale Interactions with the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project PI: Monty Worthington Project Team: LGL Alaska Research Associates, Tamara McGuire University of Alaska Anchorage, Jennifer Burns TerraSond, Ltd Greeneridge Science Inc., Charles Greene EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Cook Inlet, Alaska is home to some of the greatest tidal energy resources in the U.S., as well as an endangered population of beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas). Successfully permitting and operating a tidal power project in Cook Inlet requires a biological assessment of the potential and realized effects of the physical presence and sound footprint of tidal turbines on the distribution, relative abundance, and behavior of Cook Inlet beluga whales. ORPC Alaska, working with the Project Team—LGL Alaska Research Associates, University of Alaska Anchorage, TerraSond, and Greeneridge Science—undertook the following U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) study to characterize beluga whales in Cook Inlet – Acoustic Monitoring of Beluga Whale Interactions with the Cook Inlet Tidal Energy Project (Project). ORPC Alaska, LLC, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC, (collectively, ORPC). ORPC is a global leader in the development of hydrokinetic power systems and eco-conscious projects that harness the power of ocean and river currents to create clean, predictable renewable energy.
    [Show full text]
  • Detection and Classification of Whale Acoustic Signals
    Detection and Classification of Whale Acoustic Signals by Yin Xian Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Duke University Date: Approved: Loren Nolte, Supervisor Douglas Nowacek (Co-supervisor) Robert Calderbank (Co-supervisor) Xiaobai Sun Ingrid Daubechies Galen Reeves Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering in the Graduate School of Duke University 2016 Abstract Detection and Classification of Whale Acoustic Signals by Yin Xian Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Duke University Date: Approved: Loren Nolte, Supervisor Douglas Nowacek (Co-supervisor) Robert Calderbank (Co-supervisor) Xiaobai Sun Ingrid Daubechies Galen Reeves An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering in the Graduate School of Duke University 2016 Copyright c 2016 by Yin Xian All rights reserved except the rights granted by the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial Licence Abstract This dissertation focuses on two vital challenges in relation to whale acoustic signals: detection and classification. In detection, we evaluated the influence of the uncertain ocean environment on the spectrogram-based detector, and derived the likelihood ratio of the proposed Short Time Fourier Transform detector. Experimental results showed that the proposed detector outperforms detectors based on the spectrogram. The proposed detector is more sensitive to environmental changes because it includes phase information. In classification, our focus is on finding a robust and sparse representation of whale vocalizations. Because whale vocalizations can be modeled as polynomial phase sig- nals, we can represent the whale calls by their polynomial phase coefficients.
    [Show full text]
  • ECHO Program Salish Sea Ambient Noise Evaluation
    Vancouver Fraser Port Authority Salish Sea Ambient Noise Evaluation 2016–2017 ECHO Program Study Summary This study was undertaken for Vancouver Fraser Port Authority’s Enhancing Cetacean Habitat and Observation (ECHO) Program to analyze regional acoustic data collected over two years (2016–2017) at three sites in the Salish Sea: Haro Strait, Boundary Pass and the Strait of Georgia. These sites were selected by the ECHO Program to be representative of three sub-areas of interest in the region in important habitat for marine mammals, including southern resident killer whales (SRKW). This summary document describes how and why the project was conducted, its key findings and conclusions. What questions was the study trying to answer? The ambient noise evaluation study investigated the following questions: What were the variabilities and/or trends in ambient noise over time and for each site, and did these hold true for all three sites? What key factors affected ambient noise differences and variability at each site? What are the key requirements for future monitoring of ambient noise to better understand the contribution of commercial vessel traffic to ambient noise levels, and how ambient noise may be monitored in the future? Who conducted the project? JASCO Applied Sciences (Canada) Ltd., SMRU Consulting North America, and the Coastal & Ocean Resource Analysis Laboratory (CORAL) of University of Victoria were collaboratively retained by the port authority to conduct the study. All three organizations were involved in data collection and analysis at one or more of the three study sites over the two-year time frame of acoustic data collection.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the NOAA Workshop on Anthropogenic Sound and Marine Mammals, 19-20 February 2004
    Report of the NOAA Workshop on Anthropogenic Sound and Marine Mammals, 19-20 February 2004 Jay Barlow and Roger Gentry, Conveners INTRODUCTION The effect of man-made sounds on marine mammals has become a clear conservation issue. Strong evidence exists that military sonar has caused the strandings of beaked whales in several locations (Frantzis 1998; Anon. 2001). Seismic surveys using airguns may be also implicated in at least one beaked whale stranding (Peterson 2003). Shipping adds another source of noise that has been increasing with the size of ships and global trade. Overall, global ocean noise levels appear to be increasing as a result of human activities, and off central California, sound pressure levels at low frequencies have increased by 10 dB (a 10-fold increase) from the 1960s to the 1990s (Andrew et al. 2002). Within the U.S., the conservation implications of anthropogenic noise are being researched by the Navy, the Minerals Management Service (MMS), and the National Science Foundation (NSF); however, the sources of man-made sound are broader than the concerns of these agencies. The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has a broader mandate for stewardship of marine mammals and other marine resources than any other federal agency. Therefore, there is a growing need for NOAA to take an active role in research on the effects of anthropogenic sounds on marine mammals and, indeed, on the entire marine ecosystem. This workshop was organized to provide background information needed by NOAA for developing a research program that will address issues of anthropogenic sound in the world's oceans.
    [Show full text]
  • Diel and Spatial Dependence of Humpback Song and Non-Song Vocalizations in Fish Spawning Ground
    remote sensing Article Diel and Spatial Dependence of Humpback Song and Non-Song Vocalizations in Fish Spawning Ground Wei Huang, Delin Wang and Purnima Ratilal * Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Ave., Boston, MA 02115, USA; [email protected] (W.H.); [email protected] (D.W.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-617-373-8458 Academic Editors: Nicholas Makris, Xiaofeng Li and Prasad S. Thenkabail Received: 10 June 2016; Accepted: 23 August 2016; Published: 30 August 2016 Abstract: The vocalization behavior of humpback whales was monitored over vast areas of the Gulf of Maine using the passive ocean acoustic waveguide remote sensing technique (POAWRS) over multiple diel cycles in Fall 2006. The humpback vocalizations comprised of both song and non-song are analyzed. The song vocalizations, composed of highly structured and repeatable set of phrases, are characterized by inter-pulse intervals of 3.5 ± 1.8 s. Songs were detected throughout the diel cycle, occuring roughly 40% during the day and 60% during the night. The humpback non-song vocalizations, dominated by shorter duration (≤3 s) downsweep and bow-shaped moans, as well as a small fraction of longer duration (∼5 s) cries, have significantly larger mean and more variable inter-pulse intervals of 14.2 ± 11 s. The non-song vocalizations were detected at night with negligible detections during the day, implying they probably function as nighttime communication signals. The humpback song and non-song vocalizations are separately localized using the moving array triangulation and array invariant techniques. The humpback song and non-song moan calls are both consistently localized to a dense area on northeastern Georges Bank and a less dense region extended from Franklin Basin to the Great South Channel.
    [Show full text]
  • Passive Acoustic Monitoring for Marine Mammals in the Jacksonville Range Complex 2010
    Passive Acoustic Monitoring for Marine Mammals in the Jacksonville Range Complex 2010 Sarah C. Johnson, Ana Širović, Jasmine S. Buccowich, Amanda J. Debich, Lauren K. Roche, Bruce Thayre, Sean M. Wiggins, John A. Hildebrand, Lynne E. W. Hodge and Andrew J. Read Marine Physical Laboratory Scripps Institution of Oceanography University of California San Diego La Jolla, CA 92037 Minke Whale, Photo by Amanda J. Debich MPL TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM # 548 February 2014 Prepared for US Fleet Forces Command and submitted to Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Atlantic, under Contract No. N62470-10D-3011 issued to HDR, Inc. 1 Suggested Citation: SC Johnson, A Širović, JS Buccowich, AJ Debich, LK Roche, B Thayre, SM Wiggins, JA Hildebrand, LEW Hodge, and AJ Read. 2014. Passive Acoustic Monitoring for Marine Mammals in the Jacksonville Range Complex 2010. Final Report. Submitted to Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Atlantic, Norfolk, Virginia, under Contract No. N62470-10D-3011 issued to HDR, Inc. Individual technical reports of the HARP deployments are available at: http://www.navymarinespeciesmonitoring.us/reading-room/ 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Project Background ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Methods .......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Visual and Passive Acoustic Observations of Blue Whale Trios from Two Distinct Populations
    Received: 27 March 2019 Revised: 13 August 2019 Accepted: 13 August 2019 DOI: 10.1111/mms.12643 NOTE Visual and passive acoustic observations of blue whale trios from two distinct populations Elena Schall1,2 | Lucia Di Iorio3 | Catherine Berchok4 | Diego Filún1,2 | Luis Bedriñana-Romano1,6 | Susannah J. Buchan7,8,9 | Ilse Van Opzeeland2,10 | Richard Sears5 | Rodrigo Hucke-Gaete1,6 1NGO Centro Ballena Azul, Universidad Austral de Chile, Valdivia, Chile 2Physical Oceanography of the Polar Seas, Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Bremerhaven, Germany 3Chorus Research Institute, Grenoble Institute of Engineering, Grenoble, France 4Marine Mammal Laboratory, Alaska Fisheries Science Center/NOAA, Seattle, Washington 5Mingan Island Cetacean Study, Saint-Lambert, Canada 6Instituto de Ciencias Marinas y Limnológicas, Universidad Austral de Chile, Valdivia, Chile 7Center for Oceanographic Research COPAS Sur-Austral, University of Concepción, Concepción, Chile 8Centro de Estudios Avanzados en Zonas Aridas (CEAZA), Coquimbo, Chile 9Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Biology Department, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 10Helmholtz Institute for Functional Marine Biodiversity, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany Correspondence Elena Schall, Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Klußmannstraße 3d, 27570 Bremerhaven, Germany. Email: [email protected] Blue whale populations from both hemispheres are thought to undertake annual migrations between high latitude feeding grounds and low latitude breeding
    [Show full text]
  • Automatic and Passive Whale Localization in Shallow Water Using Gunshots Julien Bonnel, Grégoire Le Touzé, Barbara Nicolas, Jerome Mars, Cedric Gervaise
    Automatic and passive whale localization in shallow water using gunshots Julien Bonnel, Grégoire Le Touzé, Barbara Nicolas, Jerome Mars, Cedric Gervaise To cite this version: Julien Bonnel, Grégoire Le Touzé, Barbara Nicolas, Jerome Mars, Cedric Gervaise. Automatic and passive whale localization in shallow water using gunshots. OCEANS 2008 - OCEANS ’08 MTS/IEEE. Oceans, Poles and Climate: Technological Challenges, Sep 2008, Quebec City, Canada. pp.1-6, 10.1109/OCEANS.2008.5151937. hal-00324547 HAL Id: hal-00324547 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00324547 Submitted on 25 Sep 2008 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Automatic and passive whale localization in shallow water using gunshots Julien Bonnel Gregoire Le Touze,´ Cedric Gervaise GIPSA-Lab/DIS Barbara Nicolas, E3I2 Grenoble INP, France and Jer´ omeˆ I. Mars ENSIETA (Brest), France Email: [email protected] GIPSA-Lab/DIS Grenoble INP, France Abstract— This paper presents an automatic and passive local- in the bay of Fundy (Canada) and are probably implied in ization algorithm for low frequency impulsive sources in shallow reproduction [13]. As they are emitted near the surface, they water. This algorithm is based on the normal mode theory which could be used for an automatic alert system to avoid whales characterizes propagation in this configuration.
    [Show full text]
  • Vessel Noise Cuts Down Communication Space for Vocalizing Fish and Marine Mammals
    Received: 7 September 2017 | Accepted: 8 November 2017 DOI: 10.1111/gcb.13996 PRIMARY RESEARCH ARTICLE Vessel noise cuts down communication space for vocalizing fish and marine mammals Rosalyn L. Putland1 | Nathan D. Merchant2 | Adrian Farcas2 | Craig A. Radford1 1Leigh Marine Laboratory, Institute of Marine Science, University of Auckland, Abstract Warkworth, New Zealand Anthropogenic noise across the world’s oceans threatens the ability of vocalizing 2Centre for Environment, Fisheries and marine species to communicate. Some species vocalize at key life stages or whilst Aquaculture Science, Lowestoft, Suffolk, UK foraging, and disruption to the acoustic habitat at these times could lead to adverse Correspondence consequences at the population level. To investigate the risk of these impacts, we Rosalyn L. Putland, Leigh Marine Laboratory, Institute of Marine Science, University of investigated the effect of vessel noise on the communication space of the Bryde’s Auckland, Warkworth, New Zealand. whale Balaenoptera edeni, an endangered species which vocalizes at low frequencies, Email: [email protected] and bigeye Pempheris adspersa, a nocturnal fish species which uses contact calls to Funding information maintain group cohesion while foraging. By combining long-term acoustic monitor- Royal Society of New Zealand, Grant/Award Number: RDF-UOA1302 ing data with AIS vessel-tracking data and acoustic propagation modelling, the impact of vessel noise on their communication space was determined. Routine ves- sel passages cut down communication space by up to 61.5% for bigeyes and 87.4% for Bryde’s whales. This influence of vessel noise on communication space exceeded natural variability for between 3.9 and 18.9% of the monitoring period.
    [Show full text]
  • Low Frequency Vocalizations Attributed to Sei Whales (Balaenoptera Borealis)
    Low frequency vocalizations attributed to sei whales (Balaenoptera borealis) Mark F. Baumgartner Biology Department, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543 Sofie M. Van Parijs and Frederick W. Wenzel Northeast Fisheries Science Center, 166 Water Street, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543 Christopher J. Tremblay Bioacoustics Research Program, Cornell University, 159 Sapsucker Woods Road, Ithaca, New York 14850 H. Carter Esch Biology Department, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543 Ann M. Warde Bioacoustics Research Program, Cornell University, 159 Sapsucker Woods Road, Ithaca, New York 14850 ͑Received 15 February 2008; revised 2 May 2008; accepted 19 May 2008͒ Low frequency ͑Ͻ100 Hz͒ downsweep vocalizations were repeatedly recorded from ocean gliders east of Cape Cod, MA in May 2005. To identify the species responsible for this call, arrays of acoustic recorders were deployed in this same area during 2006 and 2007. 70 h of collocated visual observations at the center of each array were used to compare the localized occurrence of this call to the occurrence of three baleen whale species: right, humpback, and sei whales. The low frequency call was significantly associated only with the occurrence of sei whales. On average, the call swept from 82 to 34 Hz over 1.4 s and was most often produced as a single call, although pairs and ͑more rarely͒ triplets were occasionally detected. Individual calls comprising the pairs were localized to within tens of meters of one another and were more similar to one another than to contemporaneous calls by other whales, suggesting that paired calls may be produced by the same animal.
    [Show full text]
  • Structural Characteristics of Pulsed Calls of Long
    This article was downloaded by: [Dalhousie University] On: 13 April 2012, At: 04:42 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Bioacoustics: The International Journal of Animal Sound and its Recording Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tbio20 STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PULSED CALLS OF LONG- FINNED PILOT WHALES GLOBICEPHALA MELAS LEAH NEMIROFF a & HAL WHITEHEAD a a Biology Department, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada Available online: 13 Apr 2012 To cite this article: LEAH NEMIROFF & HAL WHITEHEAD (2009): STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PULSED CALLS OF LONG-FINNED PILOT WHALES GLOBICEPHALA MELAS , Bioacoustics: The International Journal of Animal Sound and its Recording, 19:1-2, 67-92 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09524622.2009.9753615 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/ terms-and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Ecoacoustics to Characterize the Marine Acoustic Environment Off the North Atlantic French Saint-Pierre-Et-Miquelon Archipelago
    Journal of Marine Science and Engineering Article Use of Ecoacoustics to Characterize the Marine Acoustic Environment off the North Atlantic French Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon Archipelago Paul Nguyen Hong Duc 1,* , Dorian Cazau 2, Paul R. White 3, Odile Gérard 4, Joël Detcheverry 5, Frank Urtizberea 6 and Olivier Adam 1,7 1 CNRS, Institut Jean Le Rond d’Alembert, Sorbonne Université, UMR 7190, F-75005 Paris, France; [email protected] 2 Lab-Sticc, ENSTA Bretagne, CEDEX 9, 29806 Brest, France; [email protected] 3 Institue of Sound and Vibration Research, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK; [email protected] 4 Direction Générale de l’Armement Techniques Navales, 83000 Toulon, France; [email protected] 5 Association SPM Frag’îles, 97500 St. Pierre et Miquelon, France; [email protected] 6 Direction des Territoires, de l’Alimentation et de la Mer (DTAM), Service Agriculture, Alimentation, Eau et Biodiversité, 97500 St. Pierre et Miquelon, France; [email protected] 7 CNRS, Institut des Neurosciences Paris-Saclay, Université Paris-Saclay, 91190 Gif-sur-Yvette, France * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Visual observations of the marine biodiversity can be difficult in specific areas for different reasons, including weather conditions or a lack of observers. In such conditions, passive acoustics represents a potential alternative approach. The objective of this work is to demonstrate how Citation: Nguyen Hong Duc, P.; information about marine biodiversity can be obtained via detailed analysis of the underwater Cazau, D.; White, P.R.; Gérard, O.; acoustic environment. This paper presents the first analysis of the Saint-Pierre-and-Miquelon (SPM) Detcheverry, J.; Urtizberea, F.; archipelago underwater acoustic environment.
    [Show full text]