↓ Skip to main content

Changes in humpback whale singing behavior with abundance: Implications for the development of acoustic surveys of cetaceans

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Changes in humpback whale singing behavior with abundance: Implications for the development of acoustic surveys of cetaceans
Published in
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, September 2017
DOI 10.1121/1.5001502
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael J Noad, Rebecca A Dunlop, Amelia K Mack

Abstract

Acoustic surveys of vocal animals can have significant advantages over visual surveys, particularly for marine mammals. For acoustic density estimates to be viable, however, the vocal output of the animals surveyed needs to be determined under a range of conditions and shown to be a robust predictor of abundance. In this study, the songs of humpback whales, one of the most vocal and best studied species of marine mammals, were tested as predictors of abundance. Two acoustic metrics, the number of singing whales and amount of songs produced, were compared with the number of whales seen traversing a study site on the eastern coast of Australia over an 18 year period. Although there were predictive relationships between both metrics and numbers of passing whales, these relationships changed significantly as the population grew in size. The proportion of passing whales that sang decreased as the population increased. Singing in humpback whales, therefore, is a poor predictor even of relative abundance and illustrates the caution required when developing acoustic survey techniques particularly when using social vocalizations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 20%
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Master 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 12 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 36%
Environmental Science 7 16%
Engineering 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 14 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 October 2017.
All research outputs
#16,051,091
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
#7,874
of 10,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,566
of 328,544 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
#52
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,579 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,544 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.