Abstract

Advancements in the use of acoustic methods to characterize, map, and assess spawning aggregations has expanded our understanding of the reproductive biology, life histories, and stock sizes of vulnerable species (Costa et al. 2014, Fudge and Rose 2009). The versatility of active acoustics (echosounders) has permitted the estimation of fish abundances and biomasses in challenging environments, such as reefs and estuaries (Boswell et al. 2007), while the efficiency of passive acoustics (hydrophones) to monitor the sounds produced by aggregating fishes has increasingly been embraced to identify spawning areas and periods (Rowell et al. 2015, Wilson et al. 2014). However, a logical and desirable progression to efficiently and accurately estimate fish abundances from their sounds has been hindered by the complexity of fish calling rates, fish choruses, and acoustic propagation (Locascio and Mann 2008, Schärer et al. 2012, Schärer et al. 2014). As such, a comparison between independent measurements of sound and abundance has been proposed as a feasible, initial method to determine if levels of fish sound production can be used to estimate fish abundances (Gannon 2008, Rountree et al. 2006).

PDF Preview