Assessing spontaneous howling rates in captive wolves using automatic passive recorders

Vicente Palacios; Shannon Barber-Meyer; Barbara Marti-Domken; Lori J. Schmidt

doi:10.1080/09524622.2021.2006083

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70226912

Assessing spontaneous howling rates in captive wolves using automatic passive recorders

Vicente Palacios·Shannon Barber-Meyer·Barbara Marti-Domken·Lori J. Schmidt

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We studied the spontaneous vocal behaviour of captive wolves at the International Wolf Center (IWC) in Minnesota (spring 2019 and winter 2020), and the Centro del Lobo Ibérico Félix Rodríguez de la Fuente (CLIFRF) in Spain (winter 2020). We used AudioMoth recording devices to record wolf howling 24 hr/day. We identified 412 solo howl series and 403 chorus howls and found differences between wolves at the two centres. Vocal rates for North American wolves at the IWC (7.8 chorus howls/day in spring and 4.8 chorus howls/day in winter) were higher than rates obtained for Iberian wolves from CLIFRF (3.8 chorus howls/day in winter). Howling rates obtained in our study were similar to those obtained for captive Mexican wolves and greater than those reported for wild wolves. Hourly distribution of howling was also different between centres. The greatest howling activity identified at IWC was at pre-sunrise, while at CLIFRF the peak occurred at sunset. Weather conditions had little influence on the vocal behaviour of the captive wolves we studied. We show the potential of passive recorders to study topics of animal acoustic communication, such as vocal rates and temporal patterns, that have not been deeply addressed due to technological constraints.

Explore related subjects

Bioacoustics: The International Journal of Animal Sound and its Recording Article

Source-reported bounding extent: 41.988045484792806° to 47.90635329599402° latitude; -91.8288266658783° to -6.571261882781982° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Vicente Palacios, Shannon Barber-Meyer, Barbara Marti-Domken, Lori J. Schmidt. 2021-12-17. Assessing spontaneous howling rates in captive wolves using automatic passive recorders. https://doi.org/10.1080/09524622.2021.2006083

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2019

Statistical learning mitigation of false positives from template-detected data in automated acoustic wildlife monitoring

Audio sampling of the environment can provide long-term, landscape-scale presence-absence data to model populations of sound-producing wildlife. Automated detection systems allow researchers to avoid manually searching through large volumes of recordings, but often produce unacceptable false positive rates. We developed methods that allow researchers to improve template-based automated detection using a suite of statistical learning algorithms when false positive rates are problematic. To test our method, we acquired 668 hours of recordings in the Sonoran Desert, California USA between March 2016 and May 2017, and created spectrogram cross-correlation templates for three target avian species. We trained and tested five classification algorithms and four performance-weighted ensemble classifier methods on target signals and false alarms from March 2016, and then selected high-performing ensemble classifiers from the train/test phase to predict the class of new detections thereafter. For three target species, our ensemble classifiers were able to identify 98%, 81%, and 100% of false alarms compared with the baseline template detection system, and comparative positive predictive values improved from 6% to 69%, 87% to 95%, and 2% to 77%. We show that statistical learning approaches can be implemented to mitigate false detections acquired via template-based automated detection in automated acoustic wildlife monitoring.

California↗

USGS2016

Tools for automated acoustic monitoring within the R package monitoR

The R package monitoR contains tools for managing an acoustic-monitoring program including survey metadata, template creation and manipulation, automated detection and results management. These tools are scalable for use with small projects as well as larger long-term projects and those with expansive spatial extents. Here, we describe typical workflow when using the tools in monitoR. Typical workflow utilizes a generic sequence of functions, with the option for either binary point matching or spectrogram cross-correlation detectors.

Bioacoustics: The International Journal of Animal ↗

USGS2016

Assessment of error rates in acoustic monitoring with the R package monitoR

Detecting population-scale reactions to climate change and land-use change may require monitoring many sites for many years, a process that is suited for an automated system. We developed and tested monitoR, an R package for long-term, multi-taxa acoustic monitoring programs. We tested monitoR with two northeastern songbird species: black-throated green warbler ( Setophaga virens ) and ovenbird ( Seiurus aurocapilla ). We compared detection results from monitoR in 52 10-minute surveys recorded at 10 sites in Vermont and New York, USA to a subset of songs identified by a human that were of a single song type and had visually identifiable spectrograms (e.g. a signal:noise ratio of at least 10 dB: 166 out of 439 total songs for black-throated green warbler, 502 out of 990 total songs for ovenbird). monitoR’s automated detection process uses a ‘score cutoff’, which is the minimum match needed for an unknown event to be considered a detection and results in a true positive, true negative, false positive or false negative detection. At the chosen score cut-offs, monitoR correctly identified presence for black-throated green warbler and ovenbird in 64% and 72% of the 52 surveys using binary point matching, respectively, and 73% and 72% of the 52 surveys using spectrogram cross-correlation, respectively. Of individual songs, 72% of black-throated green warbler songs and 62% of ovenbird songs were identified by binary point matching. Spectrogram cross-correlation identified 83% of black-throated green warbler songs and 66% of ovenbird songs. False positive rates were for song event detection.

Bioacoustics: The International Journal of Animal ↗