Cited by 57Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorMusic and Audio Processing

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Assessment of ecosystem biodiversity by acoustic diversity indices

Gage, Stuart H., Napoletano, Brian M., Cooper, Michael C.·2001·The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

Abstract

Assessment of ecosystem biodiversity by measurement of acoustic diversity was explored [B. L. Krause, Explorers J., Winter, 156–160 (1993)]. Specific acoustic indices (e.g., based on frequency spectrum) were developed and correlated with standard diversity indices (e.g., standard species abundance indices). Necessary technological infrastructures and analytic processes to measure acoustic dynamics of ecological biodiversity were explored. An automated web-based infrastructure capable of capturing, processing, and relaying real-time field measurements from multiple ecosystems to desktop and home computers was developed, tested, and implemented. Key infrastructure components were remote field instrumentation, remote computer processing, wireless digital relay instrumentation, Internet server, and automation, relational database, and website software. A dynamic digital library of ecological acoustic samples, correlated ecosystem attributes, and acoustic analysis methodologies was established. Library resources, including digital sound files captured from ecosystems, were made available to researchers and the public over the Internet [N. Metzger and M. Blumenthal, Realizing Info. Future, NAP, 113–119 (1994)]. Indices of acoustic ecosystem diversity were refined through application on existing digital ecosystem sound recordings and digital sounds captured from multiple ecosystems. The performance of these indices was compared to standard biodiversity indices applied to the same ecosystems.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1121/1.4744597

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Gage, S. H., Napoletano, B. M., & Cooper, M. C.
Affiliations
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • Ferris State University (US)
Venue
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
Published
2001-05-01
Volume
109
Issue
5_Supplement
Pages
2430-2430
ISSN
  • 0001-4966 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-8524
OpenAlex
W2051107268
Cited by
57
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
Type
conference abstract
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Music and Audio Processing
Keywords
ecosystem biodiversity, bioacoustics, frequency spectrum analysis, web-based data acquisition, biodiversity assessment

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