Summary1. Animals produce sounds for diverse biological functions such as defending territories, attracting mates, deterring predators, navigation, finding food and maintaining contact with members of their social group. Biologists can take advantage of these acoustic behaviours to gain valuable insights into the spatial and temporal scales over which individuals and populations interact. Advances in bioacoustic technology, including the development of autonomous cabled and wireless recording arrays, permit data collection at multiple locations over time. These systems are transforming the way we study individuals and populations of animals and are leading to significant advances in our understandings of the complex interactions between animals and their habitats. 2. Here, we review questions that can be addressed using bioacoustic approaches, by providing a primer on technologies and approaches used to study animals at multiple organizational levels by ecologists, behaviourists and conservation biologists. 3. Spatially dispersed groups of microphones (arrays) enable users to study signal directionality on a small scale or to locate animals and track their movements on a larger scale. 4. Advances in algorithm development can allow users to discriminate among species, sexes, age groups and individuals. 5. With such technology, users can remotely and non-invasively survey populations, describe the soundscape, quantify anthropogenic noise, study species interactions, gain new insights into the social dynamics of sound-producing animals and track the effects of factors such as climate change and habitat fragmentation on phenology and biodiversity. 6. There remain many challenges in the use of acoustic monitoring, including the difficulties in performing signal recognition across taxa. The bioacoustics community should focus on developing a *Correspondence author. E-mail: marmots@ucla.edu 2011, 48, 758-767 doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.01993.x Ó 2011 The Authors. Journal of Applied Ecology Ó 2011 British Ecological Society common framework for signal recognition that allows for various species' data to be analysed by any recognition system supporting a set of common standards. 7. Synthesis and applications. Microphone arrays are increasingly used to remotely monitor acoustically active animals. We provide examples from a variety of taxa where acoustic arrays have been used for ecological, behavioural and conservation studies. We discuss the technologies used, the methodologies for automating signal recognition and some of the remaining challenges. We also make recommendations for using this technology to aid in wildlife management. Journal of Applied Ecology

Approximately two thirds of migratory songbirds in eastern North America negotiate the Gulf of Mexico (GOM), where inclement weather coupled with no refueling or resting opportunities can be lethal. However, decisions made when navigating such features and their consequences remain largely unknown due to technological limitations of tracking small animals over large areas. We used automated radio telemetry to track three songbird species (Red-eyed Vireo, Swainson's Thrush, Wood Thrush) from coastal Alabama to the northern Yucatan Peninsula (YP) during fall migration. Detecting songbirds after crossing ∼1,000 km of open water allowed us to examine intrinsic (age, wing length, fat) and extrinsic (weather, date) variables shaping departure decisions, arrival at the YP, and crossing times. Large fat reserves and low humidity, indicative of beneficial synoptic weather patterns, favored southward departure across the Gulf. Individuals detected in the YP departed with large fat reserves and later in the fall with profitable winds, and flight durations (mean = 22.4 h) were positively related to wind profit. Age was not related to departure behavior, arrival, or travel time. However, vireos negotiated the GOM differently than thrushes, including different departure decisions, lower probability of detection in the YP, and longer crossing times. Defense of winter territories by thrushes but not vireos and species-specific foraging habits may explain the divergent migratory behaviors. Fat reserves appear extremely important to departure decisions and arrival in the YP. As habitat along the GOM is degraded, birds may be limited in their ability to acquire fat to cross the Gulf. migration | ecological barrier | Gulf of Mexico | songbirds | weather D uring migration, animals encounter ecological barriers, inhospitable environmental features that prevent or impede movement due to increased risk of mortality from starvation, predation, collision, and severe environmental conditions (e.g., weather for aerial migrants, aquatic temperature or chemical gradients for aquatic migrants) (1-5). Because barriers can have important consequences on survival and future reproductive success (6), animals have evolved behavioral, morphological, and/or physiological means to safely negotiate them (7-9). Barriers can include large geographic features (e.g., large water bodies, deserts, mountains), inhospitable land cover types (e.g., agricultural "deserts"), anthropogenic structures (e.g., tall buildings, towers, dams, weirs), and unfavorable weather and aquatic conditions (e.g., droughts, storms, strong temperature gradients), although the extent to which any of these functions as a barrier to migration varies (4,5,(10)(11)(12).Approximately two thirds of all songbird species and millions of individuals breeding in eastern Canada and the United States encounter the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) while migrating to tropical or subtropical wintering grounds in the Caribbean, Mexico, and Central and South America (13). Unfavorable weather conditions combine...

Point counts are the most frequently used technique for sampling bird populations and communities, but have well‐known limitations such as inter‐ and intraobserver errors and limited availability of expert field observers. The use of acoustic recordings to survey birds offers solutions to these limitations. We designed a Soundscape Recording System (SRS) that combines a four‐channel, discrete microphone system with a quadraphonic playback system for surveying bird communities. We compared the effectiveness of SRS and point counts for estimating species abundance, richness, and composition of riparian breeding birds in California by comparing data collected simultaneously using both methods. We used the temporal‐removal method to estimate individual bird detection probabilities and species abundances using the program MARK. Akaike's Information Criterion provided strong evidence that detection probabilities differed between the two survey methods and among the 10 most common species. The probability of detecting birds was higher when listening to SRS recordings in the laboratory than during the field survey. Additionally, SRS data demonstrated a better fit to the temporal‐removal model assumptions and yielded more reliable estimates of detection probability and abundance than point‐count data. Our results demonstrate how the perceptual constraints of observers can affect temporal detection patterns during point counts and thus influence abundance estimates derived from time‐of‐detection approaches. We used a closed‐population capture–recapture approach to calculate jackknife estimates of species richness and average species detection probabilities for SRS and point counts using the program CAPTURE. SRS and point counts had similar species richness and detection probabilities. However, the methods differed in the composition of species detected based on Jaccard's similarity index. Most individuals (83%) detected during point counts vocalized at least once during the survey period and were available for detection using a purely acoustic technique, such as SRS. SRS provides an effective method for surveying bird communities, particularly when most species are detected by sound. SRS can eliminate or minimize observer biases, produce permanent records of surveys, and resolve problems associated with the limited availability of expert field observers.

Although acoustic recordings have recently gained popularity as an alternative to point counts for surveying birds, little is known about the relative performance of the two methods for detecting tropical bird species across multiple vegetation types. During June and July 2008, we collected species detection/nondetection data to compare the performance of a quadraphonic acoustic recording system and point counts for estimating species richness and composition and detection probabilities of 15 rare, moderately common, and common tropical bird species across six structurally distinct vegetation types (coastal dune scrub, mangrove, low‐stature deciduous thorn forest, early and late successional medium‐stature semievergreen forest, and grazed pastures) in the northern Yucatan Peninsula. We selected five rare species endemic to the Yucatan Peninsula and 10 moderately common and common species that also occur in other tropical regions. Species richness and composition did not differ between survey methods in any of the vegetation types. At the population level, however, we found support for an effect of method on detection probability for most species. For 13 species, regardless of their abundance, acoustic recordings yielded detection probabilities as high as or higher than those for point counts across all vegetation types. The remaining two species were better detected by point counts in pastures and coastal scrub, where greater visibility likely improved sightings of these species. However, these species were detected as well as or better by acoustic recordings in forests and mangroves where detections were primarily auditory. In tropical regions where experienced field observers may not be available and funding for field surveys may be limited, acoustic recordings offer a practical solution for determining species richness and composition and the occupancy patterns of most species. However, for some species, a combination of methods will provide the most reliable data. Regardless of the method selected, analyses that account for variation in detection probability among vegetation types will be necessary because most species in our study demonstrated vegetation‐dependent detection probabilities.

No abstract