The utility of different acoustic indicators to describe biological sounds of a coral reef soundscape

dc.contributor.authorDimoff, Sean A.
dc.contributor.authorHalliday, William D.
dc.contributor.authorPine, Matthew K.
dc.contributor.authorTietjen, Krista L.
dc.contributor.authorJuanes, Francis
dc.contributor.authorBaum, Julia K.
dc.date.accessioned2021-03-01T23:29:05Z
dc.date.available2021-03-01T23:29:05Z
dc.date.copyright2021en_US
dc.date.issued2021
dc.description.abstractMonitoring coral reefs is vital to the conservation of these at-risk ecosystems. While most current monitoring methods are costly and time-intensive, passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) could provide a cost-effective, large scale reef monitoring tool. However, for PAM to be reliable, the results must be field tested to ensure that the acoustic methods used accurately represent the certain ecological components of the reef being studied. For example, recent acoustic studies have attempted to describe the diversity of coral reef fish using the Acoustic Complexity Index (ACI) but despite inconsistent results on coral reefs, ACI is still being applied to these ecosystems. Here, we investigated the potential for ACI and sound pressure level (SPL – another common metric used), to accurately respond to biological sounds on coral reefs when calculated using three different frequency resolutions (31.2 Hz, 15.6 Hz, and 4 Hz). Acoustic recordings were made over two to three-week periods in 2017 and 2018 at sites around Kiritimati (Christmas Island), in the central equatorial Pacific. We hypothesized that SPL would be positively correlated with the number of nearby fish sounds in the low frequency band and with snapping shrimp snaps in the high frequency band, but that ACI would rely on its settings, specifically its frequency resolution, to describe sounds in both frequency bands. We found that nearby fish sounds were partially responsible for changes in low frequency SPL in the morning, during crepuscular chorusing activity, but not at other times of day. Snapping shrimp snaps, however, were responsible for large changes in high frequency SPL. ACI results were reliant on the frequency band chosen, with the 31.2 Hz frequency resolution models being chosen as the best models. In the low frequency band, the effect of fish knocks was positive and significant only in the 31.2 Hz and 15.6 Hz models while in the high frequency band snapping shrimp snaps were negatively associated with ACI in all frequency resolutions. These results contribute to a growing body of evidence against the continued use of ACI without standardization on highly energetic underwater ecosystems like coral reefs and highlight the importance of extensive field testing of new acoustic metrics prior to their adoption and proliferation.en_US
dc.description.reviewstatusRevieweden_US
dc.description.scholarlevelFacultyen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipWe are grateful to the Government and people of Kiribati, especially Taratau Kirata, and Jacob and Lavinia Teem, for their support in conducting our fieldwork. SAD and KLT were supported by Mitacs Accelerate Fellowships. JKB received support from an NSERC Discovery Grant and the E.W.R. Steacie Memorial Fellowship, a Pew Fellowship in Marine Conservation, the Rufford Maurice Laing Foundation, the Canadian Foundation for Innovation, the British Columbia Knowledge Development Fund, the University of Victoria and University of Victoria’s Centre for Asia-Pacific Initiatives. FJ had support from the Canadian Foundation for Innovation, the British Columbia Knowledge Development Fund, the University of Victoria, and Liber Ero Foundation. MP was funded by a Mitacs Elevate Fellowship. WH was supported by the W. Garfield Weston Foundation.en_US
dc.identifier.citationDimoff, S. A., Halliday, W. D., Pine, M. K., Tietjen, K. L., Juanes, F., & Baum, J. K. (2021). The utility of different acoustic indicators to describe biological sounds of a coral reef soundscape. Ecological Indicators, 124, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107435.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107435
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1828/12731
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherEcological Indicatorsen_US
dc.subjectSoundscapes
dc.subjectCoral reefs
dc.subjectUnderwater acoustics
dc.subjectAcoustic indices
dc.subjectPassive acoustic monitoring
dc.subject.departmentDepartment of Biology
dc.titleThe utility of different acoustic indicators to describe biological sounds of a coral reef soundscapeen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Dimoff_SeanA_EcolIndic_2021.pdf
Size:
9.45 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: