01373nas a2200229 4500008004100000245006900041210006800110260001600178300000700194490000600201520070600207653002400913653001800937653001500955653002900970653000900999653003101008653002101039100002301060700001901083856004101102 2018 eng d00aUnderwater Soundscape Monitoring and Fish Bioacoustics: A Review0 aUnderwater Soundscape Monitoring and Fish Bioacoustics A Review cJan-09-2018 a360 v33 a

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.

10aacoustic monitoring10aambient noise10acoral reef10aEnvironmental monitoring10afish10apassive acoustic detection10aunderwater sound1 aLindseth, Adelaide1 aLobel, Phillip uhttp://www.mdpi.com/2410-3888/3/3/3602981nas a2200253 4500008004100000020001800041245009800059210006900157300000800226520217600234653001402410653001802424653003102442653001302473653002402486653002502510653002602535653003802561653001002599653001802609653001502627100001802642856006702660 2018 eng d a978035566050000aImpacts of Ambient Noise on Minke Whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) Habitat Use and Behavior0 aImpacts of Ambient Noise on Minke Whale Balaenoptera acutorostra a1713 a

This study examines the soundscape of minke whale habitat in the Scottish Inner Hebrides around the islands of Mull, Coll and Muck and near the Ardnamurchan Peninsula of the Scottish mainland. To compare the soundscape with minke whale presence and behavior, acoustic recordings were paired with behavior and respiration data. Acoustic recordings were taken using a Soundtrap 300, deployed from a whale watching vessel. Data was taken from June - September 2016. The soundscape was analyzed by comparing power spectral density averaged into octave bands (center frequencies from 16 Hz – 128 kHz). The soundscape of the region is ephemeral, with some locations having very different acoustic patterns depending on transient animal and human activity. Humans contribute to the soundscape through movement of small ships and dredging. Notable biological contributors to the soundscape include dolphins and snapping shrimp. Outside the island of Coll is quieter at mid-frequencies (2-8 kHz octave bands). Inside Coll is quieter at frequencies in the 16-128 kHz octave bands. Ardmore point, in the Sound of Mull, is louder for most frequencies. These differences create a potential way for animals to navigate or orient based on sound. Observed minke whale behaviors were categorized into behavior states to create a behavior budget. Minke whales in this area spend 56% of their daytime feeding, 7% traveling and 39% in other activities. The average inter-breath interval for minke whales in this study was 60.7s. Minke presence and behavior were compared with sound levels in 1/3rd octave bands using generalized linear models. Minke whale presence and behavior both correlate with changes in the Soundscape. Minke whales are less likely to be seen with higher levels of low (31 Hz) and high (25.4 kHz) frequency sound. Higher levels of sound at low (63 Hz) frequencies were associated with lower probability of minke whales feeding. Higher probability of minke whales feeding in higher levels of high (25.4 kHz) frequency sound may indicate that minke whales are optimizing that time which is spent in regions with higher levels of noise at these frequencies.

10aacoustics10aambient noise10aBalaenoptera acutorostrata10aBehavior10abiological sciences10aConservation biology10aEnvironmental science10aHealth and environmental sciences10aMinke10aPure sciences10aSoundscape1 aRoland, Adele uhttps://search.proquest.com/docview/2020840628?accountid=1518102616nas a2200265 4500008004100000020002200041022001400063245003000077210003000107260004400137300001300181490000700194520186200201653003502063653001802098653002602116653002402142653002902166653001502195653002302210653001802233100002302251700002102274856005502295 2017 eng d a978-3-319-59476-7 a0947-265700aPrimate Habitat Acoustics0 aPrimate Habitat Acoustics aChambSpringer International Publishing a79 - 1070 v633 a

Natural habitats are not recording studios. Calls emitted in nature encounter an irregular assortment of hard surfaces that reflect and scatter the wave front, producing complicated patterns of constructive and destructive interference. The propagated wave front is subsequently disturbed by wind, thermal gradients, and atmospheric absorption. Collectively, these phenomena result in an unpredictable and untidy acoustic environment. Furthermore, thunder, rain, crashing waves, or the relentless chatter of biotic sources can result in high ambient-noise levels that may mask the signal, overwhelm the recipient, and obliterate significant nuances and embellishments. Thus, vocal communication is hampered by attenuation, reverberation, distortion, and acoustic disturbances. Accordingly, the twin components of vocal communication, sound production and acoustic perception, may have undergone persistent selection to counter the most prominent impediments to both hearing and being heard. Primates have radiated from rain forest to grassland and other habitats, and each habitat differs acoustically. Hence, there is reason to believe that the duration, amplitude, pitch, and composition of primate vocal repertoires, the timing of emissions, and the placement and orientation of vocalizers is not haphazard, but each has become tuned to the acoustic parameters of the natal habitat to heighten the clarity of vocal exchanges. This chapter begins with an overview of the acoustic properties of rain forest, riverine forest, and savanna habitats occupied by East African primates, which is followed by reviews of how primate calls become distorted when propagated in natural habitats and how distortion scores have been used to explore the acoustic adaptation hypothesis. Finally, significant opportunities for additional research are highlighted.

10aacoustic adaptation hypothesis10aambient noise10aamplitude fluctuation10aanimal vocalization10acomparative bioacoustics10aDistortion10aexcess attenuation10areverberation1 aBrown, Charles, H.1 aWaser, Peter, M. uhttp://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-59478-102432nas a2200241 4500008004100000022001400041245014400055210006900199260002000268300001600288490000800304520158900312653001801901653002501919653001201944653001201956653002201968653002301990100002002013700001902033700001802052856012002070 2013 eng d a0022-094900aMaintaining acoustic communication at a cocktail party: heterospecific masking noise improves signal detection through frequency separation0 aMaintaining acoustic communication at a cocktail party heterospe cOct-24-20132050 a4655 - 46650 v2163 a

We examined acoustic masking in a chirping katydid species of the Mecopoda elongata complex due to interference with a sympatric Mecopoda species where males produce continuous trills at high amplitudes. Frequency spectra of both calling songs range from 1 to 80 kHz; the chirper species has more energy in a narrow frequency band at 2 kHz and above 40 kHz. Behaviourally, chirper males successfully phase-locked their chirps to playbacks of conspecific chirps under masking conditions at signal-to- noise ratios (SNRs) of −8 dB. After the 2 kHz band in the chirp had been equalised to the level in the masking trill, the breakdown of phase-locked synchrony occurred at a SNR of +7 dB. The remarkable receiver performance is partially mirrored in the selective response of a first-order auditory interneuron (TN1) to conspecific chirps under these masking conditions. However, the selective response is only maintained for a stimulus including the 2 kHz component, although this frequency band has no influence on the unmasked TN1 response. Remarkably, the addition of masking noise at 65 dB sound pressure level (SPL) to threshold response levels of TN1 for pure tones of 2 kHz enhanced the sensitivity of the response by 10 dB. Thus, the spectral dissimilarity between masker and signal at a rather low frequency appears to be of crucial importance for the ability of the chirping species to communicate under strong masking by the trilling species. We discuss the possible properties underlying the cellular/synaptic mechanisms of the ‘novelty detector’.

10aambient noise10aauditory interneuron10ainsects10akatydid10anovelty detection10aselective encoding1 aSiegert, M., E.1 aRömer, Heiner1 aHartbauer, M. uhttp://jeb.biologists.org/cgi/doi/10.1242/jeb.089888https://syndication.highwire.org/content/doi/10.1242/jeb.089888