TY - JOUR

T1 - Estimating effective detection area of passive, static acoustic data loggers from playback experiments with cetacean vocalisations

AU - Nuuttila, Hanna K.

AU - Brundiers, Katharina

AU - Dahne, Michael

AU - Koblitz, Jens C.

AU - Thomas, Len

AU - Courtene-Jones, Winnie

AU - Evans, Peter G. H.

AU - Turner, John R.

AU - Bennell, Jim D.

AU - Hiddink, Jan G.

PY - 2018/12

Y1 - 2018/12

N2 - 1. Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) is used for many vocal species, but few studies have quantified the fraction of vocalisations captured and how animal distance and sound source level affect detection probability. Quantifying the detection probability or, the effective detection area (EDA) of a recorder is essential for estimating absolute density and abundance from PAM data. Both are necessary prerequisites for designing and implementing monitoring studies.2. We tested the detector performance of cetacean click loggers (C-PODs) using artificial and recorded harbour porpoise clicks played at a range of distances and source levels. Detection rate of individual clicks and click sequences (or click trains) was calculated. A Generalised Additive Model (GAM) was used to create a detection function and estimate the effective detection radius (EDR) and area (EDA) for both types of signals.3. Source level and distance from logger influenced the detection probability. Whilst differences between loggers were evident, detectability was influenced more by the deployment site than within-logger variability. Maximum distance for detecting real recorded porpoise clicks was 566 m. The mean EDR for artificial signals with source level 176 dB re 1 µPa @ 1m was 187 m., and for a recorded vocalisation with source level up to 182 dB re 1 µPa, 188 m. For detections classified as harbour porpoise click sequences the mean EDR was 72 m 4. The analytical methods presented are a valid technique of estimating the EDA of any logger used in abundance estimates. We present a practical way to obtain data with a marine mammal click logger, with the caveat that artificial playbacks cannot mimic real animal behaviour and are at best able to account for some of the variability in detections between sites, removing logger and propagation effects so that what remains is density and behavioural differences. If calibrated against real-world EDAs (e.g. from tagged animals) it is possible to attain site-specific estimates of detection area and calculate absolute density estimates. We highlight the importance of accounting for both biological and environmental factors affecting vocalisations so that accurate estimates of detection area can be determined, and effective monitoring regimes implemented.

AB - 1. Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) is used for many vocal species, but few studies have quantified the fraction of vocalisations captured and how animal distance and sound source level affect detection probability. Quantifying the detection probability or, the effective detection area (EDA) of a recorder is essential for estimating absolute density and abundance from PAM data. Both are necessary prerequisites for designing and implementing monitoring studies.2. We tested the detector performance of cetacean click loggers (C-PODs) using artificial and recorded harbour porpoise clicks played at a range of distances and source levels. Detection rate of individual clicks and click sequences (or click trains) was calculated. A Generalised Additive Model (GAM) was used to create a detection function and estimate the effective detection radius (EDR) and area (EDA) for both types of signals.3. Source level and distance from logger influenced the detection probability. Whilst differences between loggers were evident, detectability was influenced more by the deployment site than within-logger variability. Maximum distance for detecting real recorded porpoise clicks was 566 m. The mean EDR for artificial signals with source level 176 dB re 1 µPa @ 1m was 187 m., and for a recorded vocalisation with source level up to 182 dB re 1 µPa, 188 m. For detections classified as harbour porpoise click sequences the mean EDR was 72 m 4. The analytical methods presented are a valid technique of estimating the EDA of any logger used in abundance estimates. We present a practical way to obtain data with a marine mammal click logger, with the caveat that artificial playbacks cannot mimic real animal behaviour and are at best able to account for some of the variability in detections between sites, removing logger and propagation effects so that what remains is density and behavioural differences. If calibrated against real-world EDAs (e.g. from tagged animals) it is possible to attain site-specific estimates of detection area and calculate absolute density estimates. We highlight the importance of accounting for both biological and environmental factors affecting vocalisations so that accurate estimates of detection area can be determined, and effective monitoring regimes implemented.

KW - C-POD

KW - density estimation

KW - detection function

KW - effective detection radius

KW - static passive acoustic monitoring

KW - abundance

U2 - 10.1111/2041-210X.13097

DO - 10.1111/2041-210X.13097

M3 - Article

VL - 9

SP - 2362

EP - 2371

JO - Methods in Ecology and Evolution

JF - Methods in Ecology and Evolution

SN - 2041-210X

IS - 12

ER -