Passive acoustic monitoring shows no effect of anthropogenic noise on acoustic communication in the invasive round goby (<i>Neogobius melanostomus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) can be a powerful tool to survey populations of soniferous species in natural settings. Using PAM allows monitoring of behaviour and activity unobtrusively to get a more accurate assessment of behavioural responses than traditional techniques. The use of PAM can also be beneficial for behaviourally cryptic species or other taxa that might be missed by more traditional sampling methods. To quantify seasonality of reproduction in an aquatic invasive species and to assess possible interactions between both abiotic and biotic noise and acoustic ecology, we deployed multiple hydrophones to fully characterise the acoustic behaviour of round goby ( Neogobius melanostomus ), a highly invasive species. We also aimed to quantify levels of anthropogenic noise around the goby communities. We tested correlations of round goby calling rates with overall noise levels and the presence of boat traffic as direct tests of the hypothesised role of noise on natural acoustic behaviour of fish. Round goby showed a clear diel patterning of calling behaviour, with the highest activity during the night and ceasing at midday; supporting the importance of acoustic—as opposed to visual—signalling for mate attraction. Calls also allowed us to pinpoint spawning areas for possible remediation. We saw no correlation between measures of background noise and calling behaviour or presence of boats and calling, suggesting that increased levels of noise have no effect on the natural calling behaviour of this species. Passive acoustic monitoring of round goby calling behaviour is a promising technique for those interested in remediation of this highly invasive species, as it can be difficult to quantify population levels by more conventional means. The lack of noise effects we see suggests that noise from recreational boats does not disrupt signalling in this species with limited hearing range, although more investigation is needed to ascertain whether noise could be a stressor in other contexts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".