Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 507

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

AudioMoth: Evaluation of a smart open acoustic device for monitoring biodiversity and the environment

Open access
Hill, Andrew P., Prince, Peter, Piña Covarrubias, Evelyn, Doncaster, C. Patrick, Snaddon, Jake L., Rogers, Alex·2018·Methods in Ecology and Evolution

Abstract

The cost, usability and power efficiency of available wildlife monitoring equipment currently inhibits full ground‐level coverage of many natural systems. Developments over the last decade in technology, open science, and the sharing economy promise to bring global access to more versatile and more affordable monitoring tools, to improve coverage for conservation researchers and managers. Here we describe the development and proof‐of‐concept of a low‐cost, small‐sized and low‐energy acoustic detector: “AudioMoth.” The device is open‐source and programmable, with diverse applications for recording animal calls or human activity at sample rates of up to 384 kHz. We briefly outline two ongoing real‐world case studies of large‐scale, long‐term monitoring for biodiversity and exploitation of natural resources. These studies demonstrate the potential for AudioMoth to enable a substantial shift away from passive continuous recording by individual devices, towards smart detection by networks of devices flooding large and inaccessible ecosystems. The case studies demonstrate one of the smart capabilities of AudioMoth, to trigger event logging on the basis of classification algorithms that identify specific acoustic events. An algorithm to trigger recordings of the New Forest cicada (Cicadetta montana) demonstrates the potential for AudioMoth to vastly improve the spatial and temporal coverage of surveys for the presence of cryptic animals. An algorithm for logging gunshot events has potential to identify a shotgun blast in tropical rainforest at distances of up to 500 m, extending to 1 km with continuous recording. AudioMoth is more energy efficient than currently available passive acoustic monitoring devices, giving it considerably greater portability and longevity in the field with smaller batteries. At a build cost of ∼US$43 per unit, AudioMoth has potential for varied applications in large‐scale, long‐term acoustic surveys. With continuing developments in smart, energy‐efficient algorithms and diminishing component costs, we are approaching the milestone of local communities being able to afford to remotely monitor their own natural resources.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/2041-210x.12955

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 21 references

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Browning E., 2017, Conservation technology: Acoustic monitoring, WWF Conservation Technology Series, 1
  2. 10.1080/15614263.2013.800671 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/j.cub.2014.07.005 · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2014.07.005
  4. Hill A. P., 2017, Data from: Audiomoth: Evaluation of a smart open acoustic device for monitoring biodiversity and the environment, Dryad Digital Repository
  5. Hill A. P. Rogers A. &Prince P.(2017).Hardware from: Audiomoth: Evaluation of a smart open acoustic device for monitoring biodiversity and the environment. Circuithub project page.https://doi.org/10.5258/soton/d0334 · doi:10.5258/soton/d0334
  6. 10.1145/2750858.2807535 · doi:10.1145/2750858.2807535
  7. 10.1016/j.is.2016.11.002 · doi:10.1016/j.is.2016.11.002
  8. 10.1038/nj7653-253a · doi:10.1038/nj7653-253a
  9. 10.1525/bio.2010.60.1.9 · doi:10.1525/bio.2010.60.1.9
  10. Pinchen B. J., 2002, The history, ecology and conservation of the New Forest cicada, British Wildlife, 13, 258
  11. Prince P. Rogers A. &Hill A.(2017).Software from: Audiomoth: Evaluation of a smart open acoustic device for monitoring biodiversity and the environment. Github project page.https://doi.org/10.5258/soton/d0332 · doi:10.5258/soton/d0332
  12. Scopoli J. A., 1772, Observationes zoologicae, Annus V, Historico‐Naturalis Lipsiae, 1772, 70
  13. 10.18178/ijesd.2016.7.7.834 · doi:10.18178/ijesd.2016.7.7.834
  14. wa Maina C. Muchiri D. &Njoroge P.(2016).Cost effective acoustic monitoring of biodiversity and bird populations in Kenya.bioRxiv 072546.https://doi.org/10.1101/072546 · doi:10.1101/072546
  15. 10.1016/j.tree.2012.11.001 · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2012.11.001

Cited by

See all 507

Metadata

Authors
Hill, A. P., Prince, P., Piña Covarrubias, E., Doncaster, C. P., Snaddon, J. L., & Rogers, A.
Venue
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-01-15
Volume
9
Issue
5
Pages
1199-1211
ISSN
2041-210X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2772345051
Cited by
507
References
21
FWCI
19.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid
Funders
  • University of Southampton
  • University of Oxford
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (1658469)
  • Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (202650)
  • Rufford Foundation (17047‐1)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: AudioMoth: Evaluation of a smart open acoustic device for monitoring biodiversity and the environment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/2041-210x.12955
The paper
Hill, A. P., Prince, P., Piña Covarrubias, E., Doncaster, C. P., Snaddon, J. L., & Rogers, A. (2018). AudioMoth: Evaluation of a smart open acoustic device for monitoring biodiversity and the environment. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12955

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.