spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

First published online December 14, 2006
Journal of Experimental Biology 210, 56-64 (2007)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2007
doi: 10.1242/jeb.02618
This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in JEB
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Villadsgaard, A.
Right arrow Articles by Tougaard, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Villadsgaard, A.
Right arrow Articles by Tougaard, J.

Echolocation signals of wild harbour porpoises, Phocoena phocoena

Anne Villadsgaard1,*, Magnus Wahlberg1,2 and Jakob Tougaard3

1 Department of Zoophysiology, Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Aarhus, C. F. Møllers Alle, DK-8000 Aarhus C., Denmark
2 Fjord & Bælt, Margrethes Plads 4, DK-5300 Kerteminde, Denmark
3 National Environmental Research Institute, Fredriksborgvej 399, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark


Figure 1
View larger version (6K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 1. The experimental set up consists of a linear, vertical array of three (A,B,D) or four (A-D) hydrophones connected via a conditioning box to a digital recorder.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (8K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 2. (A) Harbour porpoise click with signal envelope (dotted line) and the -10 dB duration of the click (horizontal line). (B) Accumulated energy content (%) in the click over time. The interval between the dotted lines is covering 95% of the energy content of the signal.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (8K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 3. Results from the transmission loss measurements and acoustic ranging calibration, using an omni-directional calibrated sound source emitting harbour porpoise clicks at a known range from 3 m depth. (A) Received level (dB re 1 µPa pp) as a function of measured range for the 4-hydrophone array. The line is a transmission loss model consisting of spherical spreading and absorption. (B) RMS error (see text) in acoustic localization as a function of the measured range for the 4-hydrophone array and the 3-hydrophone array. (C) The maximum variation in the transmission loss due to ranging variation as a function of measured range for the 4-hydrophone array and the 3-hydrophone array.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (6K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 4. The estimated apparent source level of harbour porpoise clicks as a function of the back-calculated range between the porpoise and the array.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (5K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 5. Power spectrum of a harbour porpoise click (FFT size 64, spectrum interpolated with a factor 10, sampling rate 400 kHz, rectangular window).

 

Figure 6
View larger version (7K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 6. Histogram of inter-click intervals (ICIs) from wild harbour porpoises (N=822; median 58 ms; s.d. 34 ms; bin width 10 ms).

 




© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2007