Limits to the accurate and generalizable use of soundscapes to monitor biodiversity.
Journal
Nature ecology & evolution
ISSN: 2397-334X
Titre abrégé: Nat Ecol Evol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101698577
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2023
09 2023
Historique:
received:
19
12
2022
accepted:
03
07
2023
medline:
8
9
2023
pubmed:
1
8
2023
entrez:
31
7
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Although eco-acoustic monitoring has the potential to deliver biodiversity insight on vast scales, existing analytical approaches behave unpredictably across studies. We collated 8,023 audio recordings with paired manual avifaunal point counts to investigate whether soundscapes could be used to monitor biodiversity across diverse ecosystems. We found that neither univariate indices nor machine learning models were predictive of species richness across datasets but soundscape change was consistently indicative of community change. Our findings indicate that there are no common features of biodiverse soundscapes and that soundscape monitoring should be used cautiously and in conjunction with more reliable in-person ecological surveys.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37524796
doi: 10.1038/s41559-023-02148-z
pii: 10.1038/s41559-023-02148-z
pmc: PMC10482675
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1373-1378Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Pereira, H. M., Navarro, L. M. & Martins, I. S. Global biodiversity change: the bad, the good, and the unknown. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 37, 25–50 (2012).
doi: 10.1146/annurev-environ-042911-093511
Butchart, S. H. M. et al. Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328, 1164–1168 (2010).
doi: 10.1126/science.1187512
pubmed: 20430971
Pereira, H. M. & Cooper, H. D. Towards the global monitoring of biodiversity change. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21, 123–129 (2006).
doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2005.10.015
pubmed: 16701487
Gibb, R., Browning, E., Glover‐Kapfer, P. & Jones, K. E. Emerging opportunities and challenges for passive acoustics in ecological assessment and monitoring. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 169–185 (2019).
doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13101
Sethi, S. S., Ewers, R. M., Jones, N. S., Orme, C. D. L. & Picinali, L. Robust, real-time and autonomous monitoring of ecosystems with an open, low-cost, networked device. Methods Ecol. Evol. 9, 2383–2387 (2018).
doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13089
Hill, A. P. et al. AudioMoth: evaluation of a smart open acoustic device for monitoring biodiversity and the environment. Methods Ecol. Evol. 9, 1199–1211 (2018).
doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.12955
Roe, P. et al. The Australian acoustic observatory. Methods Ecol. Evol. 12, 1802–1808 (2021).
doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13660
Sethi, S. S. et al. SAFE Acoustics: an open-source, real-time eco-acoustic monitoring network in the tropical rainforests of Borneo. Methods Ecol. Evol. 11, 1182–1185 (2020).
doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13438
Wood, C. M., Kahl, S., Chaon, P., Peery, M. Z. & Klinck, H. Survey coverage, recording duration and community composition affect observed species richness in passive acoustic surveys. Methods Ecol. Evol. 12, 885–896 (2021).
doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13571
Stowell, D. Computational bioacoustics with deep learning: a review and roadmap. PeerJ 10, e13152 (2022).
doi: 10.7717/peerj.13152
pubmed: 35341043
pmcid: 8944344
Kahl, S., Wood, C. M., Eibl, M. & Klinck, H. BirdNET: a deep learning solution for avian diversity monitoring. Ecol. Inform. 61, 101236 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.ecoinf.2021.101236
Sethi, S. S., Fossøy, F., Cretois, B. & Rosten, C. M. Management Relevant Applications of Acoustic Monitoring for Norwegian Nature—The Sound of Norway (NINA, 2021).
Sueur, J., Pavoine, S., Hamerlynck, O. & Duvail, S. Rapid acoustic survey for biodiversity appraisal. PLoS ONE 3, e4065 (2008).
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0004065
pubmed: 19115006
pmcid: 2605254
Sethi, S. S. et al. Characterizing soundscapes across diverse ecosystems using a universal acoustic feature set. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 17049–17055 (2020).
doi: 10.1073/pnas.2004702117
pubmed: 32636258
pmcid: 7382238
Sethi, S. S. et al. Soundscapes predict species occurrence in tropical forests. Oikos 2022, e08525 (2022).
doi: 10.1111/oik.08525
Sueur, J., Farina, A., Gasc, A., Pieretti, N. & Pavoine, S. Acoustic indices for biodiversity assessment and landscape investigation. Acta Acust. United Acust. 100, 772–781 (2014).
Mammides, C., Goodale, E., Dayananda, S. K., Kang, L. & Chen, J. Do acoustic indices correlate with bird diversity? Insights from two biodiverse regions in Yunnan Province, south China. Ecol. Indic. 82, 470–477 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.07.017
Bohnenstiehl, D., Lyon, R., Caretti, O., Ricci, S. & Eggleston, D. Investigating the utility of ecoacoustic metrics in marine soundscapes. J. Ecoacoust. 2, R1156L (2018).
doi: 10.22261/JEA.R1156L
Alcocer, I., Lima, H., Sugai, L. S. M. & Llusia, D. Acoustic indices as proxies for biodiversity: a meta-analysis. Biol. Rev. 97, 2209–2236 (2022).
doi: 10.1111/brv.12890
pubmed: 35978471
Sullivan, B. L. et al. The eBird enterprise: an integrated approach to development and application of citizen science. Biol. Conserv. 169, 31–40 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2013.11.003
Hershey, S. et al. in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) 131–135 (IEEE, 2017); https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASSP.2017.7952132
Ulloa, J. S., Haupert, S., Latorre, J. F., Aubin, T. & Sueur, J. scikit-maad: an open-source and modular toolbox for quantitative soundscape analysis in Python. Methods Ecol. Evol. 12, 2334–2340 (2021).
doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13711
Ferreira, L. et al. What do insects, anurans, birds, and mammals have to say about soundscape indices in a tropical savanna. J. Ecoacoust. 2, PVH6YZ (2018).
Smith, J. W. & Pijanowski, B. C. Human and policy dimensions of soundscape ecology. Glob. Environ. Change 28, 63–74 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.05.007
Ewers, R. M. et al. A large-scale forest fragmentation experiment: the stability of altered forest ecosystems project. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 366, 3292–3302 (2011).
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0049
GBIF Backbone Taxonomy: Checklist Dataset. GBIF; https://www.gbif.org/dataset/d7dddbf4-2cf0-4f39-9b2a-bb099caae36c (accessed March 2020).
Gemmeke, J. F. et al. in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) 776–780 (IEEE, 2017); https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASSP.2017.7952261