Sound Intensity

Jacobsen, Finn

doi:10.1007/978-0-387-30425-0_25

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Airborne sound consists of two coupled fields: pressure and particle-velocity, whose relationship is generally nontrivial, depending on frequency as well as the distance from, and shape of, the sound source [22,23]. For arthropods that sense airborne disturbances through particle-velocity sensitive hairs, it is typically assumed that sound detection is only possible close to the sound source in the region termed “near-field,” estimated to span 0.5 – 1 sound wavelength from the source [2,21,22,24]. So common is this terminology that the particle-velocity component of sound is often referred to as “near-field sound.” However, the particle-velocity field does not vanish at larger distances but, rather, decays continuously even into the “far-field” region.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Airborne Acoustic Perception by a Jumping Spider

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Jumping spiders (Salticidae) are famous for their visually driven behaviors [1]. Here, however, we present behavioral and neurophysiological evidence that these animals also perceive and respond to airborne acoustic stimuli, even when the distance between the animal and the sound source is relatively large (~3 m) and with stimulus amplitudes at the position of the spider of ~65 dB SPL. Behavioral experiments with the jumping spider Phidippus audax reveal that these animals respond to low frequency sounds (80 Hz; 65 dB SPL) by freezing—a common anti-predatory behavior characteristic of an acoustic startle response. Neurophysiological recordings from auditory-sensitive neural units in the brains of these jumping spiders showed responses to low-frequency tones (80 Hz at ~65 dB SPL); recordings that also represent the first record of acoustically-responsive neural units in the jumping spider brain. Responses persisted even when the distances between spider and stimulus source exceeded 3 m and under anechoic conditions. Thus, these spiders appear able to detect airborne sound at distances in the acoustic far-field region, beyond the near-field range often thought to bound acoustic perception in arthropods that lack tympanic ears (e.g. spiders) [2]. Further, direct mechanical stimulation of hairs on the patella of the foreleg was sufficient to generate responses in neural units that also responded to airborne acoustic stimuli—evidence that these hairs likely play a role in the detection of acoustic cues. We suggest that these auditory responses enable the detection of predators and facilitate an acoustic startle response.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Airborne Acoustic Perception by a Jumping Spider

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Close to the sound source (or in the near-field), particle velocity dominates, whereas further from the sound source (or far-field), pressure waves dominate (Kinsler et al, 1999). This physical phenomenon is partially driven by the fact that pressure attenuates less with distance (1/r, where r is the distance from the source) than do particle movements (1/r²) (Kinsler et al, 1999;Jacobsen, 2007). In a general sense, the near-field only occurs at a distance of approximately 0.5-1 wavelengths from the source (Kinsler et al, 1999;Jacobsen, 2007), whereas far-field sound waves ( pressure waves) can travel many meters, thus dominating long-range airborne communication in animals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropogenic noise and the bioacoustics of terrestrial invertebrates

Raboin

Elias

2019

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anthropogenic noise is an important issue of environmental concern owing to its wide-ranging effects on the physiology, behavior and ecology of animals. To date, research has focused on the impacts of far-field airborne noise (i.e. pressure waves) on vertebrates, with few exceptions. However, invertebrates and the other acoustic modalities they rely on, primarily near-field airborne and substrate-borne sound (i.e. particle motion and vibrations, respectively) have received little attention. Here, we review the literature on the impacts of different types of anthropogenic noise (airborne far-field, airborne near-field, substrate-borne) on terrestrial invertebrates. Using literature on invertebrate bioacoustics, we propose a framework for understanding the potential impact of anthropogenic noise on invertebrates and outline predictions of possible constraints and adaptations for invertebrates in responding to anthropogenic noise. We argue that understanding the impacts of anthropogenic noise requires us to consider multiple modalities of sound and to cultivate a broader understanding of invertebrate bioacoustics.

show abstract

“…As vector quantities have direction as well as magnitude, a vector sensor has the capability to accurately estimate the azimuth and elevation angles of a submerged source while avoiding left–right ambiguity, which is a problem of the line array receiver consisting of hydrophones. Thus, vector sensors have been applied in several areas, including underwater target tracking, acoustic noise reduction, and underwater communication [ 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ].…”

Section: Passive Source Localization Using Acoustic Intensity Vectmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Acoustic particle velocity

can be calculated by Euler’s equation with respect to time [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ]. If two pressure sensors are close together, the pressure gradient along the axis of two pressure sensors can be approximated through finite difference approximation.…”

Section: Passive Source Localization Using Acoustic Intensity Vectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Passive Source Localization Using Acoustic Intensity in Multipath-Dominant Shallow-Water Waveguide

Kim

Cho

Jung

et al. 2021

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The array invariant technique has been recently proposed for passive source localization in the ocean. It has successfully estimated the source–receiver horizontal range in multipath-dominant shallow-water waveguides. However, it requires a relatively large-scale hydrophone array. This study proposes an array invariant method that uses acoustic intensity, which is a vector quantity that has the same direction as the sound wave propagating through a water medium. This method can be used to estimate not only the source–receiver horizontal range, but also the azimuth to an acoustic source. The feasibility of using a vector quantity for the array invariant method is examined through a simulation and an acoustic experiment in which particle velocity signals are obtained using a finite difference approximation of the pressure signals at two adjacent points. The source localization results estimated using acoustic intensity are compared with those obtained from beamforming of the acoustic signals acquired by the vertical line array.

show abstract

Sound Intensity

Cited by 16 publications

References 40 publications

Airborne Acoustic Perception by a Jumping Spider

Airborne Acoustic Perception by a Jumping Spider

Anthropogenic noise and the bioacoustics of terrestrial invertebrates

Passive Source Localization Using Acoustic Intensity in Multipath-Dominant Shallow-Water Waveguide

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About