Editor: Nathalie Pettorelli
Acoustic quality of critical habitats for three threatened whale populations
Version of Record online: 22 OCT 2013
© 2013 The Zoological Society of London
Volume 17, Issue 2, pages 174–185, April 2014
How to Cite
Williams, R., Clark, C. W., Ponirakis, D. and Ashe, E. (2014), Acoustic quality of critical habitats for three threatened whale populations. Animal Conservation, 17: 174–185. doi: 10.1111/acv.12076
- Issue online: 3 APR 2014
- Version of Record online: 22 OCT 2013
- Manuscript Accepted: 20 AUG 2013
- Manuscript Received: 6 NOV 2012
- CONCEAL. Grant Number: FP7: PIIF-GA-2009-253407
Appendix S1. Expanded methods and results.
Figure S1. PowerPoint slides showing long-term spectral averages: two-panel hourly spectrogram plot showing time-varying distribution of acoustic energy (top: as a linear function of frequency; bottom: third-octave band frequency scale) as recorded on the MARU located near Kitimat (first slide) and in Haro Strait (second slide) during the same period (18–23 September 2010). Spectrograms are annotated with labels identifying quiet and noisy periods, which link to embedded sound files.
Table S1. Noise statistics per MARU per deployment per species-specific frequency band. This table lists the noise statistics for each MARU deployment based on the statistical distribution of the daily 5th percentile (p05), 50th percentile (p50) and 95th percentile (p95) noise levels in each frequency band (see Supporting Information Table S3). For each MARU and frequency band for which there are data, a matrix with nine values are given. ‘Min’ p05, p50 and p95 values are calculated from the distribution of all 5th percentile (p05) daily noise levels. ‘Median’ p05, p50 and p95 values are calculated from the distribution of all 50th percentile (p50) daily noise levels. ‘Max’ p05, p50 and p95 values are calculated from the distribution of all 95th percentile (p95) daily noise levels.
Table S2. Loss of communication space by site (MARU). This table lists the average lost communication space for each MARU deployment for each species-specific sound type and increasing circular area of increasing radius. A value of lost communication space is given as the percentage of space under median ambient deployment noise conditions relative to noise condition at the MARU with the lowest (median quietest) condition.
Table S3. Daily 50th percentile (p50) noise levels (dB re: 1 μPa, rms) for each MARU for fin whale song (17–28 Hz), humpback whale low-frequency song (71–708 Hz), killer whale burst-pulse (social) calls (1.5–3.5 kHz), killer whale whistles (5–12 kHz) and echolocation clicks (18–26 kHz).
Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.