Passive acoustic monitoring as a complementary strategy to assess biodiversity in the Brazilian Amazonia

Abstract

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a conservation instrument used to analyze and identify projects with potential environmental impacts, ultimately, providing mitigation strategies for decision-making (Ritter et al. 2017). In a timely debate on the conservation of the Amazon rainforest, Ritter et al. (2017) produced an essential discussion about EIAs, and reviewed three recent EIAs from infrastructure projects linked to current threats in the Brazilian Amazon basin. The authors highlighted shortfalls regarding biodiversity assessments in EIAs for the concession of roads, hydroelectric facilities and mining activities, and provided guidelines for three innovative and cost-effective methods to cope with highly diverse ecosystem: satellite remote sensing, species spectral signature, and DNA metabarcoding (Ritter et al. 2017). Although these methods are promising tools, we believe that practical solutions to sample and monitor biodiversity at large spatial and temporal scales should also take advantage from Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM), a reliable and cost-effective method that recently became widely employed to assess and monitor multiple animal taxa. Here, we advocate the use of PAM as an alternative and/or complementary tool for EIA in the Amazon basin. Sounds produced by animals have long been used to assess biodiversity (e.g., point counts for birds, and standardized acoustic transect for amphibians). Although being an effective method to detect species, its use is mostly constrained by the availability of specialists (e.g., ornithologists) to conduct fieldwork (Sueur et al. 2012). In addition, auditory monitoring is rarely replicable over large temporal and spatial scales in tropical Communicated by Dirk Sven Schmeller.

Spatio‐temporal scaling of biodiversity in acoustic tropical bird communities

“…The new feasibility of taking on such tasks opens up new avenues for community ecology, and for biodiversity research (Rajan et al 2018, Burivalova et al 2019. In dealing with the resulting data, we are no longer limited by availability to expert listeners who can identify the species from their sounds in the field, or by the impossible task of listening to all audio recordings in a given study (Ferraz et al 2008, Ribeiro et al 2017. In dealing with the resulting data, we are no longer limited by availability to expert listeners who can identify the species from their sounds in the field, or by the impossible task of listening to all audio recordings in a given study (Ferraz et al 2008, Ribeiro et al 2017.…”

Effects of agriculture and topography on tropical amphibian species and communities

“…One third of the observed species were detected only visually with SAVTS and were never recorded calling in our sampling sites during the study period. The active sampling approach we used, SAVTS, is a common and well-established method (Parris 2004, Keller et al 2009, Ribeiro et al 2012, while the passive method, AAR, is a more recent approach to survey anurans (Walls et al 2014, Ribeiro et al 2017. Although our results suggest SAVTS is a superior method to survey amphibians in tropical riparian zones, this method is limited by the number of available specialists to conduct field surveys.…”

“…, Ribeiro et al. ). Although our results suggest SAVTS is a superior method to survey amphibians in tropical riparian zones, this method is limited by the number of available specialists to conduct field surveys.…”

“…AAR devices can easily be programmed to record more hours in a day and/or more days during the rainy season without massively increasing field efforts. However, there are data processing concerns with the use of AAR devices, as it generates numerous recording files that require active listening or development of automated species identification algorithms (Ribeiro et al 2017). Additionally, potentially lower levels of detection necessitate that appropriate analytical models be used with passive survey approaches (e.g., occupancy modeling).…”

It's time to listen: there is much to be learned from the sounds of tropical ecosystems

“…Likewise, PAM can detect the recovery of species extirpated from a site after natural disaster, disease, or other perturbation (Butler et al 2016). The ability for PAM data to be collected rapidly from many places but analyzed later makes it a valuable tool for rapid inventories (Sueur et al 2008, Ribeiro et al 2017, which tend to be costly and difficult to fund. (Llusia et al 2013, Narins & Meenderink 2014.…”