A flume experiment to examine underwater sound generation by flowing water

Tonolla, Diego; Lorang, Mark S.; Heutschi, Kurt; Tockner, Klement

doi:10.1007/s00027-009-0111-5

Cited by 39 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 51 publications

(58 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although turbulence‐induced noise is dependent on flow velocity (McEachern and Lauchle, , it also depends on bed roughness elements (Nezu and Nakagawa, ; Dey, ), and these are larger in steep channels, having hydraulically rough flows. Noises generated by surface waves have been shown to decrease with an increasing water depth‐to‐bed roughness ratio (Tonolla et al ., ). Indeed, a torrent is noisier than a large river.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Physical processes involving monitoring techniques of SGN are illustrated in Figure 1. SGN measurements are signals composed of bedload noises that can be mixed with extraneous noise sources, such as rain impacts (Roth et al, 2016), turbulence-induced noises (Gimbert et al, 2014), sounds generated by surface waves (Tonolla et al, 2009), road traffic (Barrière, Oth, et al, 2015b) or fluvial traffic (Vračar and Mijić, 2011). When bedload noises are isolated by signal processing tools (Barrière, Oth, et al, 2015b;Geay et al, 2017), SGN signals can be used to infer information on bedload transport.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spectral variations of underwater river sounds

Geay

Belleudy

Laronne

et al. 2017

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audiencePassive acoustic monitoring of the self-generated noise of particle impacts has been shown to be correlated to bedload flux and bedload size. However, few studies have concentrated on the role of acoustic wave propagation in a river. For the first time, the river environment is modeled as a Pekeris waveguide, where a wave number integration technique is used to predict the transformation of sounds through their propagation paths. Focusing on the distance of a hydrophone from the channel bed and cutting off the low frequencies produced by impacts between gravel particles, we demonstrate that acoustic propagation modifies the spectral content of bedload-generated sound. Acoustic signals analyzed with the proposed model are interpreted by comparison to Helley–Smith bedload data obtained during flood conditions on the large gravel-bedded Arc-en-Maurienne River, France.This study shows that careful attention to acoustic propagation effects is required when estimating bedload grain size distribution with hydrophones in rivers, especially for rivers with slopes higher than 1%. Bedload monitoring with a hydrophone is particularly appropriate for large gravel-bed rivers – especially so during large floods, when in situ sampling is difficult or impractical and the impact of acoustic propagation is weaker relative to the self-generated noise of bedload impacts

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spectral variations of underwater river sounds

Geay

Belleudy

Laronne

et al. 2017

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sounds emitted by hydrological processes such as sediment transport and flow turbulence have specific acoustic signatures. These unique underwater soundscapes can be detected with hydrophone measurements both with laboratory experiments and large‐scale measurements in the field (Tonolla, Lorang, Heutschi, Gotschalk, & Tockner, ; Tonolla, Lorang, Heutschi, & Tockner, ). They provide measures of habitat characteristics across spatially continuous and heterogeneous environments of riverine floodplains.…”

Section: What Can Be Acoustically Monitored In Freshwater Environments?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Passive acoustic monitoring as a potential tool to survey animal and ecosystem processes in freshwater environments

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biodiversity in freshwater habitats is decreasing faster than in any other type of environment, mostly as a result of human activities. Monitoring these losses can help guide mitigation efforts. In most studies, sampling strategies predominantly rely on collecting animal and vegetal specimens. Although these techniques produce valuable data, they are invasive, time‐consuming and typically permit only limited spatial and temporal replication. There is need for the development of complementary methods. As observed in other ecosystems, freshwater environments host animals that emit sounds, either to communicate or as a by‐product of their activity. The main freshwater soniferous groups are amphibians, fish, and macroinvertebrates (mainly Coleoptera and Hemiptera, but also some Decapoda, Odonata, and Trichoptera). Biophysical processes such as flow or sediment transport also produce sounds, as well as human activities within aquatic ecosystems. Such animals and processes can be recorded, remotely and autonomously, and provide information on local diversity and ecosystem health. Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) is an emerging method already deployed in terrestrial environments that uses sounds to survey environments. Key advantages of PAM are its non‐invasive nature, as well as its ability to record autonomously and over long timescales. All these research topics are the main aims of ecoacoustics, a new scientific discipline investigating the ecological role of sounds. In this paper, we review the sources of sounds present in freshwater environments. We then underline areas of research in which PAM may be helpful emphasising the role of PAM for the development of ecoacoustics. Finally, we present methods used to record and analyse sounds in those environments. Passive acoustics represents a potentially revolutionary development in freshwater ecology, enabling continuous monitoring of dynamic bio‐physical processes to inform conservation practitioners and managers.

show abstract

“…The position of the 'noise window', an acoustic feature which is a quiet area of the spectrum, between high and low frequency noises, is of potential significance to many animals in rivers (Wysocki et al 2007;Tonolla et al 2009;2010). The noise window usually falls in the 100-300 Hz region and is dependent on environmental conditions, although the exact characteristics responsible for the position of this quiet window are unknown Tonolla et al 2010).…”

Section: Topography and Relative Submergencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tonolla et al (2009) identified a 'quiet zone' downstream from a hydraulic jump generated using an obstacle in a laboratory flume, which they hypothesised was due to the scattering of sound by bubbles from the jump. However, it is known that low frequency sounds are relatively unaffected by scattering and absorption in comparison to higher frequencies.…”

Section: Plunging Water and Bubblesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Animal perception in gravel-bed rivers: scales of sensing and environmental controls on sensory information

Johnson

Rice

2014

Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals make decisions based on the sensory information that they obtain from the environment and other organisms within that environment. In a river, this information is transported, transmitted, masked, and filtered by fluvial factors and processes, such as relative roughness and turbulent flow. By interpreting the resultant signals, animals decide on the suitability of habitat and their reaction to other organisms. While a great deal is known about the sensory biology of animals, only limited attention has been paid to the environmental controls on the propagation of sensory information within rivers. Here, the potential transport mechanisms and masking processes of the sensory information used by animals in gravel-bed rivers are assessed by considering how the physical nature of sensory signals are affected by river hydromorphology. In addition, the physical processes that animals have the potential to directly perceive are discussed. Understanding the environmental phenomena that animals directly perceive will substantially improve understanding of what controls animal distributions, shifting emphasis from identifying correlations between biotic and abiotic factors to a better appreciation of causation, with benefits for successful management.

show abstract

A flume experiment to examine underwater sound generation by flowing water

Cited by 39 publications

References 51 publications

Spectral variations of underwater river sounds

Spectral variations of underwater river sounds

Passive acoustic monitoring as a potential tool to survey animal and ecosystem processes in freshwater environments

Animal perception in gravel-bed rivers: scales of sensing and environmental controls on sensory information

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About