Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 23, 2026

A Low Cost Setup for Behavioral Audiometry in Rodents
Published on: October 16, 2012
Can you hear me? Playback experiment highlights detection range differences between commonly used PAM devices: C-POD,
Nicole R E Todd1,2, Ailbhe S Kavanagh3, Mark J Jessopp1,2
1MaREI Centre, Environmental Research Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Abstract:
Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) is a valuable tool for monitoring acoustically active small cetaceans such as the harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), with a range of devices commonly used across studies. However, to ensure comparability of findings, there is a need to compare the ability of devices to detect acoustic signals. Using a playback approach, we determined the detection probability and effective detection radius/area (EDR/EDA) for co-deployed C-POD (Cetacean POrpoise Detectors), F-POD (Full waveform capture POD) and SoundTrap acoustic monitoring devices. We conducted playbacks of harbour porpoise recordings across two transects at a range of distances from moored devices, while accounting for a range of variables likely to influence the detection probability of playbacks. Distance from the devices influenced the detection probability across all devices, and a significant difference between transects was also found for the C-POD, possibly due to different ambient noise conditions. The maximum detection distance of the playbacks for the SoundTrap and the F-POD was between 400 - 500m, and EDR was estimated at 297m (EDA 0.276 km2) and 241m (EDA 0.181 km2), respectively. The maximum detection distance for the C-POD was lower, at 300 - 400m, and an EDR of 220m (EDA 0.153 km2). A lower EDR was calculated for harbour porpoise buzzes compared to clicks across devices, due to lower source level of buzzes, suggesting that time spent foraging may be underestimated in PAM studies. The results highlight how detection ranges may differ across commonly used PAM devices, affecting comparability of detection rates across studies. EDR/EDA is an important prerequisite for PAM-derived density and abundance estimates. As such, understanding how devices differ is essential for comparing studies and appropriate planning of long-term acoustic monitoring projects, particularly where estimates of abundance are a key goal.
More Related Videos
11:39Assessment of Audio-Tactile Sensory Substitution Training in Participants with Profound Deafness Using the Event-Related Potential Technique
Published on: September 7, 2022
05:48Author Spotlight: Investigating the Impact of Emotional Prosodies on Voice Recognition and Perception
Published on: August 9, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Hearing
Perception of Sound Waves
The pitch of a sound depends on the frequency and the pressure amplitude of the source. Two sounds of the same frequency...
Difference from Background: Limit of Detection
The LOD indicates the presence or absence...
Echo
Imagine the sound is reflected back to the ears. Assuming that the source is very close to the human, the difference between hearing the two sounds—the emitted sound and the reflected sound—may be more than the minimum time for perceiving distinct sounds. If this is the case, then the...
Auditory Perception
Perceiving Loudness, Pitch, and Location
Place theory, or place coding, suggests that different pitches are heard because various sound waves activate specific locations along the cochlea's basilar membrane. The brain determines the pitch of a sound by identifying...