Title |
Discriminating between the vocalizations of Indo-Pacific humpback and Australian snubfin dolphins in Queensland, Australia
|
---|---|
Published in |
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, August 2014
|
DOI | 10.1121/1.4884772 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Alvaro Berg Soto, Helene Marsh, Yvette Everingham, Joshua N Smith, Guido J Parra, Michael Noad |
Abstract |
Australian snubfin and Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins co-occur throughout most of their range in coastal waters of tropical Australia. Little is known of their ecology or acoustic repertoires. Vocalizations from humpback and snubfin dolphins were recorded in two locations along the Queensland coast during 2008 and 2010 to describe their vocalizations and evaluate the acoustic differences between these two species. Broad vocalization types were categorized qualitatively. Both species produced click trains burst pulses and whistles. Principal component analysis of the nine acoustic variables extracted from the whistles produced nine principal components that were input into discriminant function analyses to classify 96% of humpback dolphin whistles and about 78% of snubfin dolphin calls correctly. Results indicate clear acoustic differences between the vocal whistle repertoires of these two species. A stepwise routine identified two principal components as significantly distinguishable between whistles of each species: frequency parameters and frequency trend ratio. The capacity to identify these species using acoustic monitoring techniques has the potential to provide information on presence/absence, habitat use and relative abundance for each species. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 3 | 4% |
Germany | 1 | 1% |
Portugal | 1 | 1% |
South Africa | 1 | 1% |
Cyprus | 1 | 1% |
Unknown | 61 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 17 | 25% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 18% |
Student > Master | 9 | 13% |
Student > Bachelor | 6 | 9% |
Other | 6 | 9% |
Other | 11 | 16% |
Unknown | 7 | 10% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 45 | 66% |
Environmental Science | 8 | 12% |
Engineering | 3 | 4% |
Earth and Planetary Sciences | 2 | 3% |
Linguistics | 1 | 1% |
Other | 4 | 6% |
Unknown | 5 | 7% |