Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 137:533–541, 2008 [Article]

Ó Copyright by the American Fisheries Society 2008

Passive Acoustics as a Tool in Fisheries Science

DAVID A. MANN
College of Marine Science, University of South Florida,
140 Seventh Avenue South, St. Petersburg, Florida 33701, USA

RODNEY A. ROUNTREE
Marine Ecology and Technology Applications, Inc., 23 Joshua Lane, Waquoit, Massachusetts 02536, USA

Abstract.—Many fishery biologists that are interested in documenting fish habitat and following the
movements and behavior of fishes use acoustic tags. Because over 700 fish species naturally produce low-
frequency, species-specific sounds, these can be used as natural acoustic tags. Passive acoustic approaches
(monitoring sound-producing fishes with hydrophones) show great promise for gathering data in a
noninvasive and continuous manner. In this special section, authors review past studies and contribute new
findings based on the concept of passive acoustics, in which the sounds produced by fish are used to identify
the species present and quantify their relative abundance. Fish have long been known to produce low-
frequency sounds, especially members of the families Sciaenidae, Gadidae, Ictaluridae, Cyprinidae,
Batrachoididae, Haemulidae, Lutjanidae, and Serranidae. Passive acoustic methods include the use of low-
frequency hydrophones, digital recorders, autonomous recording sonobuoys and data loggers, and towed
hydrophone arrays to record fish sounds. The sounds of fishes that have been recorded so far have been
described in monographs, scientific papers, and online digital libraries; in most cases, the recordings are
species specific and can be used to identify fish. Work is progressing in using the passive acoustic approach
along with traditional fisheries sampling methods (net and active acoustic surveys) to identify habitat use,
spawning areas, and relative abundances. The authors in this special section present new passive acoustics-
derived data on sciaenids, batrachoidids, and ictalurids. They outline the methods currently being used and
discuss their limitations, provide examples where passive acoustics has been employed successfully, warn of
pitfalls in interpreting acoustic data, and lay the groundwork for future studies.

Many fishery biologists are interested in following for sounds associated with specific behaviors. The
the movements and behavior of fishes by use of active temporal and spatial patterns of behaviors, such as
ultrasonic acoustic tagging, in which fishes are rigged spawning, can then be inferred simply by recording and
with an active acoustic tag that transmits its location to analyzing the sounds using signal processing tech-
hydrophone receivers. The emerging field of passive niques. The use of passive acoustics as a modern tool
acoustic methodology in fisheries surveys takes for fishery investigations in a digital age suggests some
advantage of the fact that many species of fish interesting possibilities and questions.
naturally produce sounds and therefore possess natural How many fishes are sound producers (i.e., already
acoustic tags. Passive acoustics utilizes low-frequency acoustically tagged)? There are more than 700 species
(,10 kHz) hydrophones to detect and monitor natural known to produce sounds from at least 30 families
sound production by fishes, which is typically (Fish and Mowbray 1970; Kaatz 2002; Johnston and
Phillips 2003; Johnston and Vives 2003; Rountree et
associated with feeding, aggressive encounters, court-
al. 2006), and many more soniferous fishes have yet to
ship, or spawning behavior. Passive acoustics has a
be recorded. Are these species harvested in commercial
long history in fish biology, but it has only recently
and recreational fisheries? Although the diversity of
been applied to fisheries and their management
soniferous fishes is poorly understood, a partial list of
(Rountree et al. 2006). Because most of these sounds
sound producers that are caught recreationally or sold
are species specific, one can use a hydrophone to listen commercially would include members of Sciaenidae
(Mok and Gilmore 1983; Johnson and Funicelli 1991;
* Corresponding author: [email protected] Saucier et al. 1992; Saucier and Baltz 1993; Luczko-
Received November 19, 2006; accepted September 10, 2007 vich et al. 1999; Gilmore 2002; Roumillat and Brouwer
Published online April 3, 2008 2004), Gadidae (Brawn 1961c; Hawkins et al. 1967;

533
534 LUCZKOVICH ET AL.

Hawkins and Rasmussen 1978; Hawkins and Amorim perch Bairdiella chrysoura were between 2 and 316 m
2000; Finstad and Nordeide 2004; Rowe and Hutch- in the presence of a background sound level of 110–
ings 2006), Clupeidae (Wahlberg and Westerberg 125 dB relative to (re) a reference effective pressure of
2002), Salmonidae (Neproshin 1972), Ictaluridae (Fine 1 lPa, assuming cylindrical spreading and a source
et al. 1997), Carangidae (Fish and Mowbray 1970), sound level of 128–135 dB re 1 lPa (Sprague and
Centrarchidae (Gerald 1971), Cyprinidae (Johnston and Luczkovich 2004). Luczkovich et al. (1999) concluded
Vives 2003), Acipenseridae (Johnston and Phillips that large aggregations of spawning weakfish and silver
2003), Anguillidae (Fish and Mowbray 1970), Ophi- perch in Pamlico Sound could be detected at least 1 km
diidae (Perez et al. 2003; Fine et al. 2007), Batrachoi- from the source based on the recorded sound level of
didae (Fine 1978; Collette and Klein-MacPhee 147 dB re 1 lPa. D’Spain and Batchelor (2006)
2003:264; Amorim et al. 2006), Lutjanidae (Fish and estimated that a chorus of fishes and invertebrates from
Mowbray 1970), Haemulidae (Burkenroad 1931; Fish a popular fishing spot off California was detectable at 2
and Mowbray 1970), Gobiidae (Adams et al. 2001; km using a 131-element hydrophone array and beam-
Lugli et al. 2003), and Serranidae (Fish and Mowbray forming signal processing techniques, although indi-
1970; Lobel 1992, 2002). The reader is referred to vidual fish calls could not be distinguished from the
Kaatz (2002) and Rountree et al. (2006) for a detailed background sound. McCauley and Cato (2000) esti-
discussion of the taxonomic distribution of sound mated that large shoals of largescale grunters Terapon
production in fishes. theraps (family Terapontidae) could be heard at a
Can sound production be used for tracking move- distance of 5–8 km from the center of the shoal on the
ment and behaviors of sound-producing fishes (i.e., are Great Barrier Reef.
these sounds acting as natural, self-recharging acoustic What if almost every individual of a population or a
tags)? Although this is an application of passive particular life stage had natural acoustic tags that
acoustic monitoring that is still being developed, provided information on fish size, species, and
sounds are produced routinely and for long periods of spawning location? This is generally the case but
time by these fishes, allowing for seasonal and diurnal requires additional study, as it can vary by species
tracking of large shoals. Luczkovich et al. (1999) used (Fish and Mowbray 1970; Rountree et al. 2006), or
hydrophones to track the migration and seasonal may be restricted to certain life stages or sexes or to the
spawning patterns of weakfish Cynoscion regalis in reproductive period (Hill et al. 1987; Mann and Lobel
Pamlico Sound, North Carolina. McCauley and Cato 1995b; Connaughton et al. 1997, 2000). The details of
(2000) described the daily summertime calling cycle of the answers to some of these questions, especially this
different fish species by means of a fixed listening last one, are contained within the papers that follow.
station on the Great Barrier Reef in Australia; peak In this paper, we introduce a group of papers that
sound levels were measured at night, but at least some grew out of a passive acoustics symposium at the 2003
fishes made sounds during each hour of the day. Annual Meeting of the American Fisheries Society in
D’Spain and Batchelor (2006) were able to track the Quebec City, Canada. Individual papers are described
vertical migration of sciaenid fishes by using a large, in a separate section below. This special section is
vertical hydrophone array in the Southern California intended to be a selection of papers that highlight new
Bight. Energy for sound production comes from the studies of fishery species (mostly sciaenids) and a
fish themselves using their drumming muscles or guide to those who are interested in using passive
stridulatory mechanisms, and these muscles are acoustics to monitor behavior and spawning of fishes.
fascinating examples of vertebrate evolution. The sonic It is good to remember while reviewing these studies
muscles are among the fastest-contracting muscles that not all fishes produce sounds. Also, in most
(e.g., those of oyster toadfish Opsanus tau can contract species, the sounds are not produced continuously but
at 400 Hz; Fine et al. 2001). In addition, some fish rather are produced more commonly at night and
(e.g., weakfish) have long-duration calling activity and during periods of specific behavioral activities, such as
have been recorded to produce sounds continually courtship, aggression, disturbance, and feeding. Some
between 1200 and 0400 hours (Connaughton and species will not produce sound at all life stages or in
Taylor 1995). Plainfin midshipmen Porichthys notatus both sexes, and others will. These challenges make
produce individual calls that last for many hours (Ibara interpretation of the results more difficult than those
et al. 1983). derived from ultrasonic tags attached to a small number
At what distance can these sounds be detected? The of fish of known species, size, and sex that have been
range over which a fish sound can be detected varies released in a given location and then tracked spatially.
with sound source levels and background sound levels. It is precisely this challenge that we tackle in this
Propagation distances measured for a single silver special section, hoping to stimulate further research in
 PASSIVE ACOUSTICS INTRODUCTION 535

passive acoustics in fisheries. We join a growing group were most likely to have produced the sounds. For
of physicists and biologists who are researching this example, the frequency of biological sound detected by
topic. For example, passive acoustic surveys as a Dobrin from hydrophone recordings made at Fort
census tool are now a part of the national effort to Macon, North Carolina, was 600 Hz, from which he
census marine life and fisheries species (Van Parijs and correctly noted that ‘‘. . .the source is very likely to be
Southall 2007; see also NOAA 2007) and are being croakers’’ (Dobrin 1947:20); later, it was discovered
explored as a potential tool for monitoring remote areas that Atlantic croakers Micropogonias undulatus re-
of the sea (ACT 2007). corded in captivity have a dominant frequency of 300–
600 Hz, which varies inversely with fish size (Fish and
Historical Studies of Sound Production by Fishes Mowbray 1970). Dobrin (1947) also noted that the
There is a long history in the study of fish sound sound frequency decreased during the season, which he
production. Indigenous peoples and Chinese fishers attributed to fish growth; larger fishes have larger swim
have used the sounds produced by spawning fish to bladders, thus producing lower dominant frequencies.
‘‘hunt’’ for fishing locations (Sadovy and Chung 2003). It was during this time that the U.S. Navy funded the
Aristotle was the first to describe the sounds of fishes work of Marie Poland Fish and William Mowbray,
(Thompson 1910). One of the first accounts of fish who catalogued many of the soniferous fishes in the
sound production in modern times came from Charles Atlantic coastal waters of the USA (Fish et al. 1952;
Darwin’s correspondence. Fritz Mueller communicated Fish and Mowbray 1970). The work of these two
to Darwin about the sound production of fishes in biologists, along with that of William Tavolga on
Brazil (Mueller 1867): ‘‘In this connection I would like gobies and blennies (Tavolga 1958, 1960), Art
to add that there is a fish in the sea by Santa Catharina Myrberg on damselfishes and reef fishes (Myrberg
which produces very melodious sounds which may 1980, 1981; Myrberg et al. 1986, 1993), Howard Winn
also serve to attract the opposite sex. The sounds are on toadfishes (Gray and Winn 1961; Winn 1964, 1967)
like the ringing of distant church bells. I only ever and squirrelfishes (Winn et al. 1964), Paul Perkins
heard them on quiet evenings when these maritime (Perkins 2001; who also worked with Winn, Fish, and
musicians swam by a rock close to the coast, but I Mowbray), and William Cummings on reef fishes and
never saw the fish.’’ It is worth noting that this fish has sciaenids (Cummings et al. 1964; Fish and Cummings
not been identified, even today. This is an example of 1972), advanced the field during the 1960s and 1970s.
how fish sounds are often heard by observers on land Many advances occurred because of a special instal-
and how much work is still left to do in this area. lation of hydrophones and an underwater television
In a pioneering study of weakfish, Tower (1908) camera off the Lerner Marine Laboratory in Bimini,
determined that the mechanism of sound production in Bahamas, which allowed these researchers to identify
sciaenids was the sonic muscles surrounding the swim soniferous fish species and study additional mecha-
bladder. Today, this remains one of the best studies of nisms and behaviors associated with sound production,
the mechanism of sound production in any fish. as described in a special symposium held there in 1963
Burkenroad (1931) studied sound production in (Tavolga 1964, 1967). One major advance during the
Louisiana fishes, noting the disturbance calls of each 1960s was the discovery that Atlantic cod Gadus
specimen and obtaining data from sound-producing morhua and haddock Melanogrammus aeglefinus held
toadfishes, midshipmen, seahorses, catfishes, spade- in captivity produce sounds associated with both
fishes, and grunts in otter trawls, seines, and hook-and- aggression and reproduction (Brawn 1961a, 1961b,
line catches while working with commercial fishers. He 1961c; Hawkins et al. 1967). Based on these laboratory
did not have any hydrophones or sound-recording observations, Anthony Hawkins and his colleagues
equipment, so his notes on disturbance calls in air are expanded the study of sound production to record
all that we have of this first soniferous-fish and haddock and Atlantic cod in natural spawning areas
fisheries survey. In the period around World War II, (Hawkins and Rasmussen 1978; Hawkins and Amorim
great strides were made in hydrophone technology in 2000; Hawkins et al. 2002). The use of passive
the USA and Britain, as the need to track submarines acoustics to monitor the spawning stock status of these
created intense interest in listening to the sounds of the gadid fishes is an ongoing focus of research for this
sea. To the surprise of some early naval researchers, the group and others (Nordeide and Folstad 2000; Bremner
sounds of the sea from ‘‘biological sources’’ were so et al. 2002; Hawkins et al. 2002; Finstad and Nordeide
loud that they often obscured vessel noise, making it 2004; Rowe and Hutchings 2004; for a summary, see
difficult to track a vessel (Dobrin 1947). Interestingly, Hawkins 1986 and Rountree et al. 2006).
this U.S. Navy hydrophone study was quite accurate One of the most extraordinary early passive acoustic
and Dobrin (1947) correctly interpreted that sciaenids studies was that carried out by Thomas Bright as part
536 LUCZKOVICH ET AL.

of the Tektite Project (Bright 1972). In 1969, scientists spawning visits by females (Lobel and Mann 1995).
living in the underwater habitat located in 15 m of They developed an early computerized passive acoustic
water within Lameshur Bay, St. John, U.S. Virgin monitoring system to document the sounds, modeled
Islands, collected extensive underwater acoustic and propagation distances, and obtained real-time records
video observations on fish behavior. They reported on of spawning events (Mann and Lobel 1995a, 1995b,
the sounds and behaviors of a number of important 1997, 1998). Lobel (2001) developed an underwater
fishes, including groupers (Serranidae). Notably, they video recorder system used in conjunction with a
included examples of underwater sounds on a vinyl closed-circuit rebreather to obtain simultaneous video
record published with the Tektite Report (Collette and and audio of these reef fishes and has since constructed
Earle 1972). The study provides detailed spectrograph- a list of fishes that make spawning sounds, including
ic analysis and data on correlations between acoustic members of Ostraciidae, Pomacentridae, Serranidae,
activity and specific behavior patterns and remains one and Scaridae (Lobel 2002).
of the most comprehensive studies of its type to date. Important research linking sound production and
Some of the most significant work on fish sound reproduction of commercially important species began
production occurred in the 1980s through the present in the 1980s with drum fishes in the shallow estuarine
because of studies conducted by Michael Fine and his systems of Florida. Michael Mok and Grant Gilmore
students on sound production by oyster toadfish (Fine (Mok and Gilmore 1983) used a continuously record-
et al. 1977a, 1977b, 2001; Fine 1978; Fine and ing hydrophone and mobile hydrophone transect
Lenhardt 1983; Fine and Pennypacker 1986; Barimo surveys combined with ichthyoplankton collections to
and Fine 1998; Thorson and Fine 2002), sciaenids demonstrate that sound production by males was
(Connaughton et al. 1997, 2000, 2002), and channel related to egg production by females in black drum
catfish Ictalurus punctatus (Fine et al. 1997). Fine and Pogonias cromis, silver perch, and spotted seatrout C.
colleagues have shown conclusively that toadfish and nebulosus. Gilmore (2003) continued to study spotted
weakfish sound production varies with temperature seatrout in great detail, obtaining the first captive
(Fine 1978; Connaughton et al. 2000, 2002), and recordings of this species, providing an excellent
toadfishes have some of the fastest vertebrate muscle review of sound production mechanisms, costs, and
contractions known (Rome et al. 1996; Fine et al. spectral properties and the spatial and temporal
2001). They have demonstrated that sounds of the distribution of sound production sites and spawning
toadfish do not propagate more than several meters habitats. Donald Baltz, William Roumillat, and Mi-
(Fine and Lenhardt 1983) but do so in a directional chael Saucier have extended Mok and Gilmore’s
pattern that can be detected by females (Barimo and (1983) approach and have also identified spotted
Fine 1998). These sounds are clearly reproductive seatrout spawning areas in South Carolina by using
advertisement calls, and hormonal conditions cause the passive acoustics (Saucier et al. 1992; Saucier and
development and growth of the swim bladder in Baltz 1993; Roumillat and Brouwer 2004). More
toadfish (Fine and Pennypacker 1986; Fine 1997). recently, Joseph Luczkovich and Mark Sprague
Martin Connaughton has worked extensively with Fine (Luczkovich et al. 1999, 2008, this issue; Sprague
on weakfish (Connaughton et al. 1997, 2000, 2002) and Luczkovich 2004) have developed much of their
and continues to contribute significantly in the field of research in North Carolina based on the groundwork
fish sound production, demonstrating that testosterone laid down by Mok and Gilmore.
implants cause development of drumming muscles in Many of the pre-2000 studies have been conducted
weakfish (Connaughton and Taylor 1995). Recently, using analog recording equipment and dedicated
Fine et al. (in press) described a novel new mechanism sonograph machines for analysis and relying on
of sound production in ophidiids that allows for magnetic tape recordings from earlier studies to
relatively high-frequency sound production. identify the species on their recordings. The quality
Another notable scientist in the field of passive of these magnetic sound recordings is deteriorating,
acoustics includes Phil Lobel, who has studied sound and the Fish and Mowbray archive was nearly lost to
production in parrotfishes (Scaridae), damselfishes science (see Rountree et al. [2002, 2006] for a
(Pomacentridae), and hamlets Alphestes spp. (Serrani- discussion of the data rescue effort). More recently,
dae) on coral reefs. Sounds produced by parrotfishes people have been sharing digital audio recordings and
and hamlets are associated with reproduction and using computer spectral analysis programs to process
gamete release (Lobel 1992). Lobel and David Mann the data. The cost of recording and storing the sounds
showed that male domino damselfish Dascyllus of the fishes in the sea is less than ever before, but the
albisella produced a distinctive sound while aggres- recordings are just as ephemeral should a hard drive
sively interacting with other males and during crash. The MacCaulay Library of Natural Sounds at
 PASSIVE ACOUSTICS INTRODUCTION 537

Cornell University (Cornell Ornithology Laboratory limitation is that data obtained from a towed hydro-
2007) is serving as the primary repository of these phone array will be unable to separate temporal and
historical recordings and is expected to develop into a spatial differences, given that fishes do not produce
National Reference Collection as newer materials are sounds equally at all times of the night. Interestingly,
added. Holt’s results suggest that (1) red drum spawning and
sound production occur in offshore shelf habitats, (2)
Passive Acoustics Special Section males are widely spaced rather than tightly aggregated,
The papers in this special section span a range of and (3) estuaries are not used during spawning. These
topics from descriptive studies of in situ recordings, kinds of observations have been lacking in habitat use
some of yet-unidentified origin, to studies of captive models of red drum, and they have obvious manage-
fishes and field recordings. Five of the papers focus on ment implications. This adult distribution is different
sciaenids and the others concern catfishes and from that of red drum spawning along the U.S. Atlantic
toadfishes, all of which are targets of fisheries around coast, which appears to be estuarine based as
the world. Two symposium papers describing Atlantic determined using passive acoustics (Johnson and
cod sound production in association with spawning, Funicelli 1991; Lowerre-Barbieri et al. 2008, this
one by Jarle Nordeide of Bodo Regional University in issue; Luczkovich et al. 2008, this issue). Further data
Norway and one by Sherry Lynn Rowe of Dalhousie are needed to compare the Atlantic coast and Gulf of
University, have since been published elsewhere Mexico red drum populations and their spawning
(Finstad and Nordeide 2004; Rowe and Hutchings behaviors.
2004). Susan Lowerre-Barbieri, Luiz Barbieri, J. R. Flan-
Scott Aalbers and Mark Drawbridge present the first ders, Arnold Woodward, Chip Cotton, and Kathryn
description of sounds from white seabass Atractoscion Knowlton, also working with red drum, determined the
nobilis (Aalbers and Drawbridge 2008, this issue). types of sound associated with spawning in a captive
They used a unique spawning pen in the open ocean group and then used that information along with
near Catalina Island, California, to observe fish in a passive acoustic recordings from field sites to charac-
near-natural environment that was semicontrolled to terize the location and timing of red drum spawning in
permit video and audio recording of individuals of coastal Georgia estuaries (Lowerre-Barbieri et al. 2008,
known size and sex. Using simultaneous video and this issue). These authors did not detect any sound
sound recordings, they demonstrated that sound production by red drum on the continental shelf outside
production was associated with spawning but that the inlets, a finding that differs from the distribution
males only produce the sounds immediately prior to described by Holt (2008, this issue) for red drum in the
spawning. Egg collections made at regular intervals Gulf of Mexico. The paper by Lowerre-Barbieri et al.
from the pens were correlated in time with the sound (2008, this issue) is significant because it clearly
production, suggesting that the monitoring of sound demonstrates that drumming rate changes with spawn-
production can be used as a surrogate for egg ing activity as recorded in a tank and that the unique
production; this will be important for converting drum rolls (similar to those observed in white seabass
passive acoustic surveys to fish adult numbers in the by Aalbers and Drawbridge 2008, this issue) produced
development of egg production models. They observed by males coincide with egg production by females in
a special rapid type of call, termed a ‘‘drum roll,’’ both the laboratory and field sites. The behavioral
which appears to be associated with spawning events. significance of such calls was unknown in this species
Their observations on behavior and sound production prior to this study and is poorly studied in most species
together set a new standard for others to follow, as it is (except haddock: Hawkins and Amorim 2000). This
rare to get such good visual and auditory sound study sheds light on how some qualitatively distinct
truthing in a nearly natural system. sound production precedes spawning and can be used
Scott Holt presents the first application of a towed to target the precise spawning sites and times in red
hydrophone array in fisheries in a study of the drum.
distribution of spawning red drum Sciaenops ocellatus Joseph Luczkovich, Chris Pullinger, Stephen John-
along the coast of Texas (Holt 2008, this issue). This son and Mark Sprague mapped the spawning habitat of
method holds great promise for spawning habitat weakfish, silver perch, spotted seatrout, and red drum
surveys, because mobile passive acoustic studies can in Pamlico Sound using sonobuoy-type autonomous
now be conducted over a wide portion of the coastline recorders (Luczkovich et al. 2008, this issue). They
and areas where fish might be spawning can be noted compared variation of the sound production of these
based on the peak sound pressure levels that occur as fishes using a qualitative drumming index with
the array is towed past the spawning sites. However, a variation in water quality and habitat parameters,
538 LUCZKOVICH ET AL.

especially depth, temperature, salinity, and dissolved among Gulf toadfish Opsanus beta in Florida, a species
oxygen. They demonstrate the usefulness of having that produces alternating calls (Fine and Thorson 2008,
simultaneous recording devices operating over a wide this issue). Fine and Thorson term this acoustic
spatial area and deployed in a regular time frame to ‘‘tagging’’ (not to be confused with the application of
allow spatial and temporal mapping of spawning active ultrasonic tags to fish) in which one male Gulf
habitat use. This approach may have advantages over toadfish attempts to call immediately after another
a towed array in certain situations, because the samples nearby male has called, a type of acoustic competition.
are taken over a wide area simultaneously. Clear This acoustic tagging work has implications for fishery
differences in spawn timing and spawning location biologists interested in sound production, because
among the four species were discovered, suggesting individual Gulf toadfish can be identified in these
that these species subdivide the available environment recordings, demonstrating that a natural, individual fish
temporally and spatially during reproductive activities. tag is possible.
They detected red drum spawning in the estuary (as Finally, Damon Gannon critically reviews the fish
was also observed by Lowerre-Barbieri et al. 2008, this passive acoustics literature and suggests how the field
issue), but they did not sample offshore beyond the should move forward (Gannon 2008, this issue). In this
inlets. These authors point the way towards the future review, he notes that most of the papers on fish sound
development of coastal observatories for monitoring production and detection have been published in
fish spawning events by relying on the new generation journals not normally read by fisheries biologists, such
of digital passive acoustic recorders that are currently as the Journal of the Acoustical Society of America and
being developed. Bioacoustics. He encourages fishery biologists to read
James Locascio and Mann used such digital passive those journals but also to consider undertaking research
acoustic recorders to study sound production by silver using passive acoustic methods, and he calls for fishery
perch and sand seatrout C. arenarius over long journals to publish more bioacoustic studies.
temporal scales in Charlotte Harbor, a Florida estuary Taken together, these papers show several approach-
(Locascio and Mann 2008, this issue). They demon- es for making passive acoustic recordings in the field. It
strated a clear nocturnal pattern of sound production by is important to remember that these papers include only
these species. Their unique recording device (the long- a few of the many species of soniferous fishes.
term acoustic recording system) shows great promise Although we have known for quite a long time that
for automating the process of recording low-frequency fish make sounds, the use of passive acoustics as
fish sounds in a regular sampling schedule over a applied to fisheries is a young science. These studies
period of days to months and recording the files to show the great potential for the use of passive acoustic
digital media. This device will greatly facilitate the approaches to study fish behavior and spawning
study of fish habitat use by passive acoustic surveys in (Rountree et al. 2006). As more studies in passive
the future. acoustics are completed, we expect this approach to be
Katie Anderson, Rodney Rountree, and Francis used in a complementary way with active acoustic
Juanes conducted the first passive acoustic survey of studies (Horne 2000) and traditional net-based surveys.
a freshwater system in which they point out the paucity Ultimately, we anticipate that passive acoustic moni-
of data on freshwater fish sound production and call for toring of fishes on ocean observing platforms will be
research to catalog soniferous fishes in other freshwater implemented and then combined with these traditional
systems (Anderson et al. 2008, this issue). They methods to produce spawning stock estimates. The goal
sampled in the Hudson River from tidal freshwater of this special section is to stimulate research in these
(,0.5%) habitats within the Tivoli Bay National areas.
Estuarine Research Reserve (located 153 km from the
river mouth) and from a mesohaline (5–18%) site References
located on the docks of New York City (3 km from the Aalbers, S. A., and M. A. Drawbridge. 2008. White seabass
river mouth). They recorded sounds from oyster spawning behavior and sound production. Transactions
toadfish and striped cusk-eels Ophidion marginatum of the American Fisheries Society 137:542–550.
at New York City and brown bullheads Ameiurus Adams, C. M., S. L. Larkin, and D. J. Lee. 2001. Volume and
nebulosus and channel catfish at Tivoli Bay. Perhaps value of marine ornamentals collected in Florida, 1990–
the most striking finding was the large number of 1998. Aquarium Sciences and Conservation 3:25–36.
ACT (Alliance for Coastal Technologies). 2007. Underwater
unknown fish sounds that were recorded at the passive acoustic monitoring for remote regions: a
freshwater site. workshop of research scientists, technology developers,
Fine and Robert Thorson show how passive and resource managers. Hawaii Institute of Marine
acoustics can be used to study individual interactions Biology, Coconut Island, February 7–9, 2007. Alliance
 PASSIVE ACOUSTICS INTRODUCTION 539

for Coastal Technologies Reference Number ACT-07-02 W. N. Tavolga, editor. Marine bio-acoustics. Pergamon
Available: http://www.act-us.info. Press, New York.
Amorim, M. C. P., R. O. Vasconcelos, J. F. Marques, and F. D’Spain, G. L., and H. H. Batchelor. 2006. Observations of
Almada. 2006. Seasonal variation of sound production in biological choruses in the Southern California bight: a
the Lusitanian toadfish (Halobatrachus didactylus). chorus at midfrequencies. Journal of the Acoustical
Journal of Fish Biology 69:1892–1899. Society of America 120:1942–1955.
Anderson, K. A., R. A. Rountree, and F. Juanes. 2008. Dobrin, M. B. 1947. Measurements of underwater noise
Soniferous fishes in the Hudson River. Transactions of produced by marine life. Science 105(2714):19–23.
the American Fisheries Society 137:616–626. Fine, M. L. 1978. Seasonal and geographic variation of the
Barimo, J. F., and M. L. Fine. 1998. Relationship of swim- mating call of the oyster toadfish, Opsanus tau.
bladder shape to the directionality pattern of underwater Oecologia 36:45–57.
sound in the oyster toadfish. Canadian Journal of Fine, M. L. 1997. Endocrinology of sound production in
Zoology 76:134–143. fishes. Marine and Freshwater Behavior and Physiology
Brawn, V. M. 1961a. Aggressive behaviour in the cod (Gadus 29:23–45.
callarias L.). Behaviour 18:107–147. Fine, M. L., J. P. Friel, D. McElroy, C. B. King, K. E. Loesser,
Brawn, V. M. 1961b. Reproductive behaviour of the cod and S. Newton. 1997. Pectoral spine locking and sound
(Gadus callarias L). Behaviour 18:177–198. production in the channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus.
Brawn, V. M. 1961c. Sound production by the cod (Gadus Copeia 1997:777–790.
callarias L.). Behaviour 18:239–245. Fine, M. L., and M. L. Lenhardt. 1983. Shallow-water
Bremner, A. A., E. A. Tripple, and J. M. Terhune. 2002. propagation of the toadfish mating call. Comparative
Sound production by adult haddock, Melanogrammus Biochemistry and Physiology A 76(2):225–231.
aeglefinus, in isolation, pairs and trios. Environmental Fine, M. L., H. Lin, B. B. Nguyen, R. A. Rountree, T. M.
Biology of Fishes 65:359–362. Cameron, and E. Parmentier. 2007. Functional morphol-
Bright, T. J. 1972. Bio-acoustic studies on marine organisms. ogy of the sonic apparatus in the fawn cusk-eel
Pages 45–70 in B. B. Collette and S. A. Earle, editors. Lepophidium profundorum. Journal of Morphology
Results of the Tektite Program: ecology of coral-reef 268:953–966.
fishes. Los Angeles County Natural History Museum
Fine, M. L., K. L. Malloy, C. B. King, S. L. Mitchell, and T. M.
Science Bulletin, Volume 14.
Cameron. 2001. Movement and sound generation by the
Burkenroad, M. D. 1931. Notes on the sound-producing
toadfish swimbladder. Journal of Comparative Physiolo-
marine fishes of Louisiana. Copeia 1931:20–28.
gy 187:371–379.
Collette, B. B., and S. A. Earle, editors. 1972. Results of the
Fine, M. L., and K. R. Pennypacker. 1986. Hormonal basis for
Tektite Program: ecology of coral-reef fishes. Los
sexual dimorphism of the sound-producing apparatus of
Angeles County Natural History Museum Science
the oyster toadfish. Experimental Neurology 92(2):289–
Bulletin, Volume 14.
298.
Collette, B. B., and G. Klein-MacPhee, editors. 2003. Bigelow
Fine, M. L., and R. F. Thorson. 2008. Use of passive acoustics
and Schroeder’s fishes of the Gulf of Maine, 3rd edition.
for assessing behavioral interactions in individual
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Connaughton, M., and M. Taylor. 1995. Seasonal and daily toadfish. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society
cycles in sound production associated with spawning in 137:627–637.
the weakfish, Cynoscion regalis. Environmental Biology Fine, M. L., H. E. Winn, L. Joest, and P. J. Perkins. 1977a.
of Fishes 42(3):233–240. Temporal aspects of calling behavior in the oyster
Connaughton, M. A., M. L. Fine, and M. H. Taylor. 1997. The toadfish, Opsanus tau. U.S. National Marine Fisheries
effects of seasonal hypertrophy and atrophy on fiber Service Fishery Bulletin 75:871–874.
morphology, metabolic substrate concentration and Fine, M. L., H. E. Winn, and B. Olla. 1977b. Communication
sound characteristics of the weakfish sonic muscle. in fishes. Pages 472–518 in T. Sebok, editor. How
Journal of Experimental Biology 200:2449–2457. animals communicate. Indiana University Press, Bloo-
Connaughton, M. A., M. L. Fine, and M. H. Taylor. 2002. mington.
Weakfish sonic muscle: influence of size, temperature, Finstad, J. L., and J. T. Nordeide. 2004. Acoustic repertoire of
and season. Journal of Experimental Biology 205:2183– spawning cod, Gadus morhua. Environmental Biology of
2188. Fishes 70:427–433.
Connaughton, M. A., M. H. Taylor, and M. L. Fine. 2000. Fish, J. F., and W. C. Cummings. 1972. A 50-dB increase in
Effects of fish size and temperature on weakfish sustained ambient noise from fish (Cynoscion xanthulus).
disturbance calls: implications for the mechanism of Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 52:1266–
sound generation. Journal of Experimental Biology 1270.
203(9):1503–1512. Fish, M. P., A. S. Kelsey, Jr., and W. H. Mowbray. 1952.
Cornell Ornithology Laboratory. 2007. Macaulay library of Studies on the production of underwater sound by North
natural sounds. Cornell Ornithology Laboratory, Ithaca, Atlantic coastal fishes. Journal of Marine Research
New York. Available: http://www.birds.cornell.edu/ 11:180–193.
macaulaylibrary. Fish, M. P., and W. H. Mowbray. 1970. Sounds of Western
Cummings, W. C., D. D. Brahy, and W. F. Herrnkind. 1964. North Atlantic fishes. Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore,
The occurrence of underwater sounds of biological origin Maryland.
off the west coast of Bimini, Bahamas. Pages 27–43 in Gannon, D. P. 2008. Passive acoustic techniques in fisheries
540 LUCZKOVICH ET AL.

science: a review and prospectus. Transactions of the application of passive acoustic monitoring. Bioacoustics
American Fisheries Society 137:638–656. 12:286–289.
Gerald, J. W. 1971. Sound production during courtship in six Lobel, P. S., and D. A. Mann. 1995. Spawning sounds of
species of sunfish (Centrarchidae). Evolution 25(1):75– damselfish, Dascyllus albisella (Pomacentridae), and
87. relationship to male size. Bioacoustics 6(2):187–198.
Gilmore, R. G., Jr. 2003. Sound production and communica- Locascio, J. V., and D. A. Mann. 2008. Diel periodicity of fish
tion in the spotted seatrout. Pages 177–195 in S. A. sound production in Charlotte Harbor, Florida. Transac-
Bortone, editor. Biology of the spotted seatrout. CRC tions of the American Fisheries Society 137:606–615.
Press, Boca Raton, Florida. Lowerre-Barbieri, S. K., L. R. Barbieri, J. R. Flanders, A. G.
Gray, G. A., and H. E. Winn. 1961. Reproductive ecology and Woodward, C. F. Cotton, and M. K. Knowlton. 2008.
sound production of the toadfish, Opsanus tau. Ecology Using passive acoustics to determine red drum spawning
42:274–282. in Georgia waters. Transactions of the American
Hawkins, A. D. 1986. Underwater sound and fish behaviour. Fisheries Society 137:562–575.
Pages 114–151 in T. J. Pitcher, editor. The behaviour of Luczkovich, J. J., R. C. Pullinger, S. E. Johnson, and M. W.
teleost fishes. Groom Hellm, London. Sprague. 2008. Identifying the critical spawning habitats
Hawkins, A. D., and M. C. P. Amorim. 2000. Spawning of sciaenids using passive acoustics. Transactions of the
sounds of the male haddock, Melanogrammus aeglefinus. American Fisheries Society 137:576–605.
Environmental Biology of Fishes 59:29–41. Luczkovich, J. J., M. W. Sprague, S. E. Johnson, and R. C.
Hawkins, A. D., L. Casaretto, M. Picciulin, and K. Olsen. Pullinger. 1999. Delimiting spawning areas of weakfish,
2002. Locating spawning haddock by means of sound. Cynoscion regalis (Family Sciaenidae) in Pamlico
Bioacoustics 12:284–286. Sound, North Carolina using passive hydroacoustic
Hawkins, A. D., C. J. Chapman, and D. J. Symonds. 1967. surveys. Bioacoustics 10:143–160.
Spawning of haddock in captivity. Nature (London) Lugli, M., H. Y. Yan, and M. L. Fine. 2003. Acoustic
215:923–925. communication in two freshwater gobies: the relationship
Hawkins, A. D., and K. J. Rasmussen. 1978. The calls of between ambient noise, hearing thresholds, and sound
gadoid fish. Journal of the Marine Biological Association spectrum. Journal of Comparative Physiology A
of the United Kingdom 58:891–911. 189:309–320.
Hill, G. L., M. L. Fine, and J. A. Musick. 1987. Ontogeny of Mann, D. A., and P. S. Lobel. 1995a. Passive acoustic
the sexually dimorphic sonic muscles in three sciaenid detection of fish sound production associated with
fishes. Copeia 1987:708–713. courtship and spawning. Bulletin of Marine Science
Holt, S. A. 2008. Distribution of red drum spawning sites 57:705–706.
identified by towed hydrophone array. Transactions of Mann, D. A., and P. S. Lobel. 1995b. Passive acoustic
the American Fisheries Society 137:551–561. detection of sounds produced by the damselfish,
Horne, J. K. 2000. Acoustic approaches to remote species Dascyllus albisella (Pomacentridae). Bioacoustics
identification: a review. Fisheries Oceanography 9:356– 6:199–213.
371. Mann, D. A., and P. S. Lobel. 1997. Propagation of
Ibara, R. M., L. T. Penny, A. W. Ebeling, G. Van Dykhuizen, damselfish (Pomacentridae) courtship sounds. Journal
and G. Cailliet. 1983. The mating call of the plainfin of the Acoustical Society of America 101:3783–3791.
midshipman fish, Porichthys notatus. Pages 205–212 in Mann, D. A., and P. S. Lobel. 1998. Acoustic behavior of the
D. L. G. Noakes, D. G. Lindquist, G. S. Helfman, and J. damselfish Dascyllus albisella: behavioral and geograph-
A. Ward, editors. Predators and prey in fishes. W. Junk ic variation. Environmental Biology of Fishes 51:421–
Publishers, The Hague, The Netherlands. 428.
Johnson, D. R., and N. A. Funicelli. 1991. Spawning of the McCauley, R. D., and D. H. Cato. 2000. Patterns of fish
red drum in Mosquito Lagoon, east-central Florida. calling in a nearshore environment in the Great Barrier
Estuaries 14:74–79. Reef. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of
Johnston, C. E., and C. T. Phillips. 2003. Sound production in London B 355:1289–1293.
sturgeon Scaphirhynchus albus and S. platorynchus Mok, H. K., and R. G. Gilmore. 1983. Analysis of sound
(Acipenseridae). Environmental Biology of Fishes production in estuarine aggregations of Pogonias cromis,
68:59–64. Bairdiella chrysoura, and Cynoscion nebulosus (Sciae-
Johnston, C. E., and S. P. Vives. 2003. Sound production in nidae). Bulletin of the Institute of Zoology, Academia
Codoma ornata (Girard) (Cyprinidae). Environmental Sinica 22:157–186.
Biology of Fishes 68:81–85. Mueller, F. 1867. Letter to Charles Darwin, 17 July 1867.
Kaatz, I. 2002. Multiple sound-producing mechanisms in Darwin Correspondence Project Archives, Cambridge
teleost fishes and hypothesis regarding their behavioral University, UK. Available: http://www.lib.cam.ac.uk/
significance. Bioacoustics 12:230–233. Departments/Darwin/.
Lobel, P. 1992. Sounds produced by spawning fishes. Myrberg, A. A. 1980. Fish bio-acoustics: its relevance to the
Environmental Biology of Fishes 33:351–358. ‘not so silent world.’ Environmental Biology of Fishes
Lobel, P. S. 2001. Fish bioacoustics and behavior: passive 5:297–304.
acoustic detection and the application of a closed-circuit Myrberg, A. A. 1981. Sound communication and interception
rebreather for field study. Marine Technology Journal in fishes. Pages 395–425 in W. N. Tavolga, A. N.
35:2–19. Popper, and R. R. Fay, editors. Hearing and sound
Lobel, P. S. 2002. Diversity of fish spawning sounds and the communication in fishes. Springer Verlag, New York.
 PASSIVE ACOUSTICS INTRODUCTION 541

Myrberg, A. A., S. J. Ha, and M. J. Shamblott. 1993. The black drum, Pogonias cromis, in Louisiana. Environ-
sounds of bicolor damselfish (Pomacentrus partitus): mental Biology of Fishes 36:257–272.
predictors of body size and a spectral basis for individual Saucier, M. H., D. M. Baltz, and W. A. Roumillat. 1992.
recognition and assessment. Journal of the Acoustical Hydrophone identification of spawning sites of spotted
Society of America 94:3067–3070. seatrout Cynoscion nebulosus (Osteichthyes: Sciaenidae)
Myrberg, A. A., Jr., M. Mohler, and J. D. Catala. 1986. Sound near Charleston, South Carolina. Northeast Gulf Science
production by males of a coral reef fish (Pomacentrus 12:141–145.
partitus): its significance to females. Animal Behavior Sprague, M. W., and J. J. Luczkovich. 2004. Measurement of
34:913–923. an individual silver perch Bairdiella chrysoura sound
Neproshin, Y. A. 1972. Some physical characteristics of pressure level in a field recording. Journal of the
sound in Pacific salmon. Zoologicheskii Zhurnal Acoustical Society of America 116:3186–3191.
51:1025–1030. Tavolga, W. 1958. Underwater sounds produced by the males
NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). of the blenniid fish Chasmodes bosquianus. Ecology
2007. The digital ocean: our oceans on a microchip. 39:759–760.
NOAA Sea Grant College Program, Silver Spring, Tavolga, W. N. 1960. Sound production and underwater
Maryland. Available: http://www.seagrant.noaa.gov/ communication in fishes. Pages 93–136 in W. E. Lanyon
themesnpa/pdf/digitaloceans_main.pdf. and W. N. Tavolga, editors. Animal sounds and
Nordeide, J. T., and I. Folstad. 2000. Is cod lekking or a communication. American Institute of Biological Sci-
promiscuous group spawner? Fish and Fisheries 1:90–93. ences, Washington, D.C.
Perez, A. A., R. Wahrlich, P. R. Pezzuto, P. R. Schwingel, F. Tavolga, W. N., editor. 1964. Marine bio-acoustics. Pergamon
R. A. Lopes, and M. Rodrigues-Ribeiro. 2003. Deep-sea Press, New York.
fishery off southern Brazil: recent trends of the Brazilian Tavolga, W. N., editor. 1967. Marine bio-acoustics, volume 2.
fishing industry. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fishery Pergamon Press, New York.
Science 31:1–18. Thompson, D. D.’A., (translator). 1910. Aristotle’s Historia
Perkins, P. J. 2001. Drumming and chattering sounds recorded Animalism, IV, 9. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
underwater in Rhode Island. Northeastern Naturalist Thorson, R. F., and M. L. Fine. 2002. Crepuscular changes in
8(3):359–370. emission rate and parameters of the boatwhistle adver-
Rome, L. C., D. A. Syme, S. Hollingworth, S. L. Lindstedt, tisement call of the gulf toadfish, Opsanus beta.
and S. M. Baylor. 1996. The whistle and the rattle: the Environmental Biology of Fishes 63:321–331.
design of sound producing muscles. Proceedings of the Tower, R. W. 1908. The production of sound in the drum
National Academy of Sciences USA 93:8095–8100. fishes, the sea robin, and the toadfish. Annals of the New
Roumillat, W. A., and M. C. Brouwer. 2004. Reproductive York Academy of Science 18:149–180.
dynamics of female spotted seatrout (Cynoscion nebu- Van Parijs, S., and B. Southall. 2007. Report of the 2006
losus) in South Carolina. U.S. National Marine Fisheries NOAA National Passive Acoustics Workshop: develop-
Service Fisheries Bulletin 102:473–487. ing a strategic program plan for NOAA’s Passive
Rountree, R. A., R. G. Gilmore, C. A. Goudey, A. D. Acoustics Ocean Observing System (PAOOS). Woods
Hawkins, J. Luczkovich, and D. Mann. 2006. Listening Hole, Massachusetts, 11–13 April 2006. National
to fish: applications of passive acoustics to fisheries Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National
science. Fisheries 31:433–446. Marine Fisheries Service. Available: http://www.nefsc.
Rountree, R. A., P. J. Perkins, R. D. Kenney, and K. R. Hinga. noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/tm/tmspo76.pdf.
2002. Sounds of western North Atlantic fishes: data Wahlberg, M., and H. Westerberg. 2002. Sounds produced by
rescue. Bioacoustics 12(2/3):242–244. herring (Clupea harengus) bubble release. Aquatic
Rowe, S., and J. A. Hutchings. 2004. The function of sound Living Resources 16(2003):271–275.
production by Atlantic cod as inferred from patterns of Winn, H. E. 1964. The biological significance of fish sounds.
variation in drumming muscle mass. Canadian Journal of Pages 213–231 in W. N. Tavolga, editor. Marine bio-
Zoology 82:1391–1398. acoustics. Pergamon Press, New York.
Rowe, S., and J. A. Hutchings. 2006. Sound production by Winn, H. E. 1967. Vocal facilitation and the biological
Atlantic cod during spawning. Transactions of the significance of toadfish sounds. Pages 213–231 in W. N.
American Fisheries Society 135:529–538. Tavolga, editor. Marine bio-acoustics, volume 2. Perga-
Sadovy, Y., and W. L. Chung. 2003. Near extinction of a mon Press, New York.
highly fecund fish: the one that nearly got away. Fish and Winn, H. E., J. A. Marshall, and B. Hazlett. 1964. Behavior,
Fisheries 4:86–99. diel activities, and stimuli that elicit sound production
Saucier, M. H., and D. M. Baltz. 1993. Spawning site and reactions to sounds in the longspine squirrelfish.
selection by spotted seatrout, Cynoscion nebulosus, and Copeia 1964:413–425.