Underwater Sounds of Pinnipeds

Schevill, William E.; Watkins, William A.; Ray, Carleton

doi:10.1126/science.141.3575.50

Cited by 43 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are many examples of organisms that are adaptively silent (curtail vocalizations) at times or in locations when or where predation risk is higher or in response to detection of a predator (Schevill 1964;Curio 1976;Spangler 1984;Jefferson et al 1991;Luczukovich et al 2000;Magrath et al 2007). Such 'acoustical avoidance' (as coined by Curio 1976) requires some predictability in predation risk, either because times and places of heightened predation risk can be reliably detected, or because predators can be detected before they have detected the prey.…”

Section: Soundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-visual crypsis: a review of the empirical evidence for camouflage to senses other than vision

Ruxton

2008

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

114

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I review the evidence that organisms have adaptations that confer difficulty of detection by predators and parasites that seek their targets primarily using sensory systems other than vision. In other words, I will answer the question of whether crypsis is a concept that can usefully be applied to non-visual sensory perception. Probably because vision is such an important sensory system in humans, research in this field is sparse. Thus, at present we have very few examples of chemical camouflage, and even these contain some ambiguity in deciding whether they are best seen as examples of background matching or mimicry. There are many examples of organisms that are adaptively silent at times or in locations when or where predation risk is higher or in response to detection of a predator. By contrast, evidence that the form (rather than use) of vocalizations and other sound-based signals has been influenced by issues of reducing detectability to unintended receivers is suggestive rather than conclusive. There is again suggestive but not completely conclusive evidence for crypsis against electro-sensing predators. Lastly, mechanoreception is highly understudied in this regard, but there are scattered reports that strongly suggest that some species can be thought of as being adapted to be cryptic in this modality. Hence, I conclude that crypsis is a concept that can usefully be applied to senses other than vision, and that this is a field very much worthy of more investigation.

show abstract

Section: Soundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-visual crypsis: a review of the empirical evidence for camouflage to senses other than vision

Ruxton

2008

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

114

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is also evidence of a decrease or even a ceasing of calls in the acoustic activity of odontocetes in the presence of natural predators. This acoustic response has also been observed in both captive and free-ranging beluga whales (Morgan 1979, Lésage et al 1999, Karlsen et al 2002, Van Parijs et al 2003, Castellote & Fossa 2006 and free-ranging narwhals Monodon monoceros (Finley et al 1990) and has been associated with threat, startle, fright, alarm, or stress contexts and interpreted as a survival strategy to avoid detection by predators (Schevill 1964, Fish & Vania 1971, Morgan 1979, Finley et al 1990, Lésage et al 1999. A playback study on N orth Atlantic right whales documented a drastic cessation in foraging behavior and interruption of the diving cycle when an alarm signal was projected, independently of the received level (N owacek et al 2004).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Changes in the acoustic behavior of gray whales Eschrichtius robustus in response to noise

Dahlheim¹,

Castellote²

2016

Endang. Species. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There is evidence of a decrease in or even a ceasing of the acoustic activity of belugas in the presence of natural predators (i.e. killer whales) or engine noise disturbance (Morgan 1979, Lesage et al 1999, Karlsen et al 2002, Van Parijs et al 2003, Castellote & Fossa 2006; these changes in beluga behavior have been associated with threat, startle, fright, alarm, or stress contexts and interpreted as a survival strategy to avoid detection by predators (Schevill 1964, Fish & Vania 1971, Morgan 1979, Lesage et al 1999. Therefore, a lower density of beluga detections in areas with higher anthropogenic noise could be related to beluga signals being masked by noise, a change in acoustic behavior, and spatial displacement, or a combination of all these effects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential for spatial displacement of Cook Inlet beluga whales by anthropogenic noise in critical habitat

Small¹,

Brost²,

Hooten³

et al. 2017

Endang. Species. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The population of beluga whales in Cook Inlet, Alaska, USA, declined by nearly half in the mid-1990s, primarily from an unsustainable harvest, and was listed as endangered in 2008. In 2014, abundance was ~340 whales, and the population trend during 1999−2014 was −1.3% yr −1 . Cook Inlet beluga whales are particularly vulnerable to anthropogenic impacts, and noise that has the potential to reduce communication and echolocation range considerably has been documented in critical habitat; thus, noise was ranked as a high potential threat in the Cook Inlet beluga Recovery Plan. The current recovery strategy includes research on effects of threats potentially limiting recovery, and thus we examined the potential impact of anthropogenic noise in critical habitat, specifically, spatial displacement. Using a subset of data on anthropogenic noise and beluga detections from a 5 yr acoustic study, we evaluated the influence of noise events on beluga occupancy probability. We used occupancy models, which account for factors that affect detection probability when estimating occupancy, the first application of these models to examine the potential impacts of anthropogenic noise on marine mammal behavior. Results were inconclusive, primarily because beluga detections were relatively infrequent. Even though noise metrics (sound pressure level and noise duration) appeared in high-ranking models as covariates for occupancy probability, the data were insufficient to indicate better predictive ability beyond those models that only included environmental covariates. Future studies that implement protocols designed specifically for beluga occupancy will be most effective for accurately estimating the effect of noise on beluga displacement.

show abstract

Underwater Sounds of Pinnipeds

Cited by 43 publications

References 3 publications

Non-visual crypsis: a review of the empirical evidence for camouflage to senses other than vision

Non-visual crypsis: a review of the empirical evidence for camouflage to senses other than vision

Changes in the acoustic behavior of gray whales Eschrichtius robustus in response to noise

Potential for spatial displacement of Cook Inlet beluga whales by anthropogenic noise in critical habitat

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About