Parvulescu Revisited: Small Tank Acoustics for Bioacousticians

Rogers, Peter H.; Hawkins, A. D.; Popper, Arthur N.; Fay, Richard R.; Gray, Michael

doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-2981-8_115

Cited by 97 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent work has also demonstrated qualitatively similar findings from experiments involving the exposure of fish to playbacks of anthropogenic noise in tanks and experiments involving the exposure of fish in open‐water conditions to real anthropogenic‐noise sources (Simpson et al ., ). However, it is important to remember that there are both behavioural and acoustic limitations to tank‐based playback experiments, including that the speakers do not generate sound in the lowest frequency ranges, that experiments are conducted in the near field and that the sound field, especially in the particle motion domain, will differ compared to that in open‐water conditions (Rogers, ; Slabbekoorn, ). In our experiments, the ambient‐noise (control) treatment was also relatively loud (mean RMS level (60s) = 117.23 dB re 1 μ Pa; Table ), in comparison with measurements of real ocean noise (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Repeated exposure reduces the response to impulsive noise in European seabass

Radford

Lèbre²,

Lecaillon³

et al. 2016

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human activities have changed the acoustic environment of many terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems around the globe. Mounting evidence indicates that the resulting anthropogenic noise can impact the behaviour and physiology of at least some species in a range of taxa. However, the majority of experimental studies have considered only immediate responses to single, relatively short‐term noise events. Repeated exposure to noise could lead to a heightened or lessened response. Here, we conduct two long‐term (12 week), laboratory‐based exposure experiments with European seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax) to examine how an initial impact of different sound types potentially changes over time. Naïve fish showed elevated ventilation rates, indicating heightened stress, in response to impulsive additional noise (playbacks of recordings of pile‐driving and seismic surveys), but not to a more continuous additional noise source (playbacks of recordings of ship passes). However, fish exposed to playbacks of pile‐driving or seismic noise for 12 weeks no longer responded with an elevated ventilation rate to the same noise type. Fish exposed long‐term to playback of pile‐driving noise also no longer responded to short‐term playback of seismic noise. The lessened response after repeated exposure, likely driven by increased tolerance or a change in hearing threshold, helps explain why fish that experienced 12 weeks of impulsive noise showed no differences in stress, growth or mortality compared to those reared with exposure to ambient‐noise playback. Considering how responses to anthropogenic noise change with repeated exposure is important both when assessing likely fitness consequences and the need for mitigation measures.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Repeated exposure reduces the response to impulsive noise in European seabass

Radford

Lèbre²,

Lecaillon³

et al. 2016

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is not a trivial task to demonstrate pressure detection of aquatic vertebrates in laboratory setups as sound fields in small tanks are complex (Parvulescu, 1964;Rogers et al, 2015), with excessive nearfield particle motion that can easily mask potential pressure detection (Kalmijn, 1988). To mitigate this problem, we used a standing wave tube setup to resolve how sound pressure affects the hearing capabilities of lungfish underwater.…”

Section: Discussion Pressure Detection Enhances Underwater Hearing Camentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Still, it is surprising that lungfish cannot detect the underwater sound pressure utilizing the pressure-to-particle motion transduction by air in their lungs. The underwater experiments of the previous study (ChristensenDalsgaard et al, 2011) were, however, probably conducted in excessive particle motion conditions in the near field of the underwater loudspeaker (Kalmijn, 1988;Parvulescu, 1964;Rogers et al, 2015). It is therefore possible that potential pressure detection was masked by excessive particle motion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Hearing of the African lungfish (Protopterus annectens) suggests underwater pressure detection and rudimentary aerial hearing in early tetrapods

Christensen

Christensen‐Dalsgaard

Madsen

2015

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the transition from an aquatic to a terrestrial lifestyle, vertebrate auditory systems have undergone major changes while adapting to aerial hearing. Lungfish are the closest living relatives of tetrapods and their auditory system may therefore be a suitable model of the auditory systems of early tetrapods such as Acanthostega. Therefore, experimental studies on the hearing capabilities of lungfish may shed light on the possible hearing capabilities of early tetrapods and broaden our understanding of hearing across the water-to-land transition. Here, we tested the hypotheses that (i) lungfish are sensitive to underwater pressure using their lungs as pressure-toparticle motion transducers and (ii) lungfish can detect airborne sound. To do so, we used neurophysiological recordings to estimate the vibration and pressure sensitivity of African lungfish (Protopterus annectens) in both water and air. We show that lungfish detect underwater sound pressure via pressure-to-particle motion transduction by air volumes in their lungs. The morphology of lungfish shows no specialized connection between these air volumes and the inner ears, and so our results imply that air breathing may have enabled rudimentary pressure detection as early as the Devonian era. Additionally, we demonstrate that lungfish in spite of their atympanic middle ear can detect airborne sound through detection of sound-induced head vibrations. This strongly suggests that even vertebrates with no middle ear adaptations for aerial hearing, such as the first tetrapods, had rudimentary aerial hearing that may have led to the evolution of tympanic middle ears in recent tetrapods.

show abstract

“…Alternatively, swim bladders could be left intact but with their connection to the inner ears removed, by, for example, extirpation of the Weberian ossicles in otophysans (Poggendorf, ; Ladich & Wysocki, ). Larger tanks (Popper et al, ) or standing‐wave tubes (Hawkins & MacLennan, ; Christensen, Christensen‐Dalsgaard & Madsen, ) may minimize some of the problems related to auditory measurements in small tanks (Rogers et al, ). It should be noted though that using larger tanks does not necessarily overcome such issues (Gray et al, ).…”

Section: Functional Morphologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Enigmatic ear stones: what we know about the functional role and evolution of fish otoliths

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Otoliths in bony fishes play an important role in the senses of balance and hearing. Otolith mass and shape are, among others, likely to be decisive factors influencing otolith motion and thus ear functioning. Yet our knowledge of how exactly these factors influence otolith motion is incomplete. In addition, experimental studies directly investigating the function of otoliths in the inner ear are scarce and yield partly conflicting results. Herein, we discuss questions and hypotheses on how otolith mass and shape, and the relationship between the sensory epithelium and overlying otolith, influence otolith motion. We discuss (i) the state‐of‐the‐art knowledge regarding otolith function, (ii) gaps in knowledge that remain to be filled, and (iii) future approaches that may improve our understanding of the role of otoliths in ear functioning. We further link these functional questions to the evolution of solid teleost otoliths instead of numerous tiny otoconia as found in most other vertebrates. Until now, the selective forces and/or constraints driving the evolution of solid calcareous otoliths and their diversity in shape in teleosts are largely unknown. Based on a data set on the structure of otoliths and otoconia in more than 160 species covering the main vertebrate groups, we present a hypothetical framework for teleost otolith evolution. We suggest that the advent of solid otoliths may have initially been a selectively neutral ‘by‐product’ of other key innovations during teleost evolution. The teleost‐specific genome duplication event may have paved the way for diversification in otolith shape. Otolith shapes may have evolved along with the considerable diversity of, and improvements in, auditory abilities in teleost fishes. However, phenotypic plasticity may also play an important role in the creation of different otolith types, and different portions of the otolith may show different degrees of phenotypic plasticity. Future studies should thus adopt a phylogenetic perspective and apply comparative and methodologically integrative approaches, including fossil otoliths, when investigating otoconia/otolith evolution and their function in the inner ear.

show abstract

Parvulescu Revisited: Small Tank Acoustics for Bioacousticians

Cited by 97 publications

References 10 publications

Repeated exposure reduces the response to impulsive noise in European seabass

Repeated exposure reduces the response to impulsive noise in European seabass

Hearing of the African lungfish (Protopterus annectens) suggests underwater pressure detection and rudimentary aerial hearing in early tetrapods

Enigmatic ear stones: what we know about the functional role and evolution of fish otoliths

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About