Bioacoustics of Fishes of the Family Sciaenidae (Croakers and Drums)

Abstract

The teleost family Sciaenidae, collectively known as the croakers and drums because of their propensity for making sound, includes roughly 70 genera and 270 species worldwide. Although many other groups of fish also communicate using sound, the sciaenids are unique in the diversity of their sound production mechanisms, variety of sounds produced, and structural variation in sound-detecting structures. This paper reviews the bioacoustics of sciaenid fishes, including mechanisms involved in the production and reception of sound, the types of sounds produced, and the functions of these sounds. We propose the hypothesis that the unusual diversity in the design of the structures associated with sound production and detection is correlated with a similar diversity in how these structures function. Production and detection of sound appear to be important aspects of sciaenid behavior. But despite the vast literature on sciaenid sound production, we know relatively little about the biological significance of their sounds. This lack of understanding leaves plenty of room for research by physiologists, bioacousticians, behavioral ecologists, and fisheries scientists.[Article] FIGURE 1.-Swim bladders of selected sciaenids. The shaded areas represent sonic muscles and the dashed horizontal lines the point at which the septum transversum merges with the body wall ventrally. The dashed vertical lines (partial or complete) divide the diagrams into left and right portions, each of which pertains to a separate species. Types IÀVI are explained in Table 2; scientific names not given below are in Table 1. The figure is reproduced from Chao (1986). First row.-A (type I): left side ¼ spot, right side ¼ spotted drum Equetus punctatus; B (type I): left side ¼ shorthead drum Larimus breviceps, right side ¼ banded drum L. fasciatus; C (type II): left side ¼ king weakfish Macrodon ancylodon, right side ¼ scalyfin corvina; D (type III): left side ¼ Peruvian banded croaker Paralonchurus peruanus, right side ¼ totoaba; E (type III): left side ¼ smalleye croaker Nebris microps, right side ¼ Atlantic croaker; F (type V): left side ¼ red drum, right side ¼ corvina Sciaena gilberti; G (type IV): left side ¼ spotfin croaker Roncador stearnsii, right side ¼ white croaker; H (type IV): black drum. Second row.-A (type IV): meagre Argyrosomus regius; B (type III): boe drum Pteroscion peli; C (type III): Angola croaker Miracorvina angolensis; D (type III): blackmouth croaker Pentheroscion mbizi; E (type III): longneck croaker (also known as flathead captainfish) Pseudotolithus typus; F (type III): cassava croaker (also known as captainfish) P. senegalensis. Third row.-A (type III): kathala croaker Kathala axillaries; B (type III): Chinese bahaba Bahaba taipingensis; C (type III): left side ¼ pama croaker Otolithoides pama, right side ¼ Plagioscion sp. from the Amazon River; D (type III): left side ¼ panna croaker Panna microdon, right side ¼ Boeseman croaker Boesemania microlepis; E (type IV): pawak croaker Pennahia pawak; F (type IV): left side ¼ pric...

Long-term acoustic monitoring of fish calling provides baseline estimates of reproductive timelines in the May River estuary, southeastern USA

“…Seasonally, silver perch, oyster toadfish, and black drum began calling in early spring and ended in May; sound production of spotted seatrout began in late winter (February) and ended in early fall (end of September), and the majority of red drum sound production occurred in August and September (Montie et al 2015). These sound production timelines were consistent with the spawning timelines observed in other studies along the Southeast Atlantic coast and the Gulf of Mexico, which were based upon on the detection of courtship sounds, gonad indices, the presence of eggs and larvae in the water column, and/or appearance of young of the year (YOY) (Dobrin 1947, Tavolga 1960, Fish & Mowbray 1970 Monczak et al: Fish soundscape of an estuary Overstreet 1983, Fine et al 1984, Beckman et al 1988, Brown-Peterson et al 1988, McMichael & Peters 1989, Murphy & Taylor 1990, Saucier & Baltz 1993, Ross et al 1995, Sprague 2000, Brown-Peterson & Warren 2002, Nieland et al 2002, Roumillat & Brouwer 2004, Ramcharitar at al. 2006, Locascio & Mann 2008, Luczkovich et al 2008, Locascio & Mann 2011, Wall et al 2013, Montie et al 2015.…”

“…Sound production in these fishes typically involves rapid movement of the sonic muscle surrounding the swim bladder. The resulting calls are species-specific due to anatomical differences in swim bladder and sonic muscle morphology as well as neural programming; therefore, call types can be used for species identification (Winn 1964, Ramcharitar et al 2006.…”

“…2015). In the family Sciaenidae, sound-producing fishes include Atlantic croaker Micropogonias undulatus, silver perch Bairdiella chrysoura, black drum Pogonias cromis, spotted seatrout Cynoscion nebulosus, weakfish C. regalis, red drum Sciaenops ocellatus, spot Leiostomus xanthurus, and southern kingfish Menticirrhus americanus (Luczkovich et al 1999, Sprague 2000, Ramcharitar et al 2006, Gannon & Taylor 2007, Lowerre-Barbieri et al 2008, Walters et al 2009, Tellechea et al 2011, Montie et al 2015. Sound production in these fishes typically involves rapid movement of the sonic muscle surrounding the swim bladder.…”

“…Sound production in these fishes typically involves rapid movement of the sonic muscle surrounding the swim bladder. The resulting calls are species-specific due to anatomical differences in swim bladder and sonic muscle morphology as well as neural programming; therefore, call types can be used for species identification (Winn 1964, Ramcharitar et al 2006.Sound production in fish species has been associated mainly with courtship behavior and reproduction (e.g. Saucier & Baltz 1993, Mann & Lobel 1995, Luczkovich et al 2008, Walters et al 2009, Mann et al 2010, Montie et al 2016, 2017.…”

Testing otolith morphology for measuring marine fish biodiversity

“…From a functional point of view, otoliths are associated with hearing and the sense of balance (Popper and Coombs 1982;Ramcharitar et al 2006;Schulz-Mirbach et al 2014). Numerous studies have demonstrated that otolith morphology, including the sulcus acusticus, is also linked to swimming Echeverría 2003, Volpedo et al 2008), feeding , spatial distribution (Gauldie and Crampton 2002;Lombarte and Cruz 2007;Sadighzadeh et al 2014) and acoustic communication (Popper and Lu 2000;Cruz and Lombarte 2004).…”