Skip to content

Research at St Andrews

Whistle classification ofsympatric false killer whale populations in Hawaiian waters yields low accuracy rates

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Author(s)

Yvonne Barkley, Erin M. Oleson, Julie N. Oswald, Erik C. Franklin

School/Research organisations

Abstract

Cetaceans are ecologically important marine predators, and designating individuals to distinct populations can be challenging. Passive acoustic monitoring provides an approach to classify cetaceans to populations using their vocalizations. In the Hawaiian Archipelago, three genetically distinct, sympatric false killer whale (Pseudorca crassidens) populations coexist: a broadly distributed pelagic population and two island-associated populations, an endangered main Hawaiian Islands (MHI) population and a Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI) population. The mechanisms that sustain the genetic separation between these overlapping populations are unknown but previous studies suggest that the acoustic diversity between populations may correspond to genetic differences. Here, we investigated whether false killer whale whistles could be correctly classified to population based on their characteristics to serve as a method of identifying populations when genetic or photographic-identification data are unavailable. Acoustic data were collected during line-transect surveys using towed hydrophone arrays. We measured 50 time and frequency parameters from whistles in 16 false killer whale encounters identified to population and used those measures to train and test random forest classification models. Random forest models that included three populations correctly classified 42% of individual whistles overall and resulted in a low kappa coefficient, κ = 0.15, indicating low agreement between models, and the true population. Whistles from the MHI population showed the highest correct classification rate (52%) compared to pelagic and NWHI whistles (42 and 36%, respectively). Pairwise random forest models classifying pelagic and MHI whistles proved slightly more accurate (62% accuracy, κ = 0.24), though a similar pelagic-NWHI model did not (56% accuracy, κ = 0.12). Results suggest that the time-frequency whistle characteristics are not suitable to confidently classify encounters to a specific false killer whale population, although certain features of whistles produced by the endangered MHI population allow for overall higher classification accuracy. Inclusion of other vocalization types, such as echolocation clicks, and alternative whistle variables may improve correct classification success for these sympatric populations.
Close

Details

Original languageEnglish
Article number645
Number of pages15
JournalFrontiers in Marine Science
Volume6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 18 Oct 2019

    Research areas

  • Cetaceans, False killer whale, Passive acoustic monitoring, Population classification, Hawaiian archipelago, Machine Learning

Discover related content
Find related publications, people, projects and more using interactive charts.

View graph of relations

Related by author

  1. Species information in whistle frequency modulation patterns of common dolphins

    Oswald, J. N., Walmsley, S., Casey, C., Fregosi, S., Southall, B. & Janik, V. M., 25 Oct 2021, In: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. B, Biological Sciences. 376, 1836, 9 p., 20210046.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

  2. Dolphin whistles can be useful tools in identifying units of conservation

    Papale, E. B., Azzolin, M. A., Cascão, I., Gannier, A., Lammers, M. O., Martin, V. M., Oswald, J. N., Perez-Gil, M., Prieto, R., Silva, M. A., Torri, M. & Giacoma, C., 29 Jul 2021, In: BMC Zoology. 6, 13 p., 22.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

  3. Oscillatory whistles—the ups and downs of identifying species in passive acoustic recordings

    Oswald, J. N., Walmsley, S. F., Casey, C., Fregosi, S., Southall, B. & Janik, V. M., 2 Jun 2021, In: Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 149, 4, 1 p., A40.

    Research output: Contribution to journalAbstractpeer-review

  4. Managing the effects of noise from ship traffic, seismic surveying and construction on marine mammals in Antarctica

    Erbe, C., Dähne, M., Gordon, J., Herata, H., Houser, D., Koschinski, S., Leaper, R., McCauley, R., Miller, B., Müller, M., Murray, A., Oswald, J., Scholik-Schlomer, A., Schuster, M., van Opzeeland, I. & Janik, V. M., 6 Nov 2019, In: Frontiers in Marine Science. 6, 21 p., 647.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Related by journal

  1. Using predicted patterns of 3D prey distribution to map king penguin foraging habitat

    Proud, R., Le Guen, C. M. M-A., Sherley, R., Kato, A., Coudert, Y-R., Ratcliffe, N., Jarman, S., Wyness, A., Arnould, J. P., Saunders, R. A., Fernandes, P. G., Boehme, L. & Brierley, A. S., 29 Nov 2021, In: Frontiers in Marine Science. 8, 18 p., 745200.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

  2. Best practices for assessing and managing bycatch of marine mammals

    Wade, P. R., Long, K. J., Francis, T. B., Punt, A. E., Hammond, P. S., Heinemann, D., Moore, J. E., Reeves, R. R., Sepúlveda, M., Sullaway, G., Sigurðsson, G. M., Siple, M. C., Víkingsson, G. A., Williams, R. & Zerbini, A. N., 17 Nov 2021, In: Frontiers in Marine Science. 8, 757330.

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

  3. Animal Borne Ocean Sensors – AniBOS – an essential component of the Global Ocean Observing System

    McMahon, C. R., Roquet, F., Baudel, S., Belbeoch, M., Bestley, S., Blight, C., Boehme, L., Carse, F., Costa, D. P., Fedak, M. A., Guinet, C., Harcourt, R., Heslop, E., Hindell, M. A., Hoenner, X., Holland, K., Holland, M., Jaine, F. R. A., Jeanniard du Dot, T., Jonsen, I. & 25 others, Keates, T. R., Kovacs, K. M., Labrousse, S., Lovell, P., Lydersen, C., March, D., Mazloff, M., McKinzie, M. K., Muelbert, M. M. C., O’Brien, K., Phillips, L., Portela, E., Pye, J., Rintoul, S., Sato, K., Sequeira, A. M. M., Simmons, S. E., Tsontos, V. M., Turpin, V., van Wijk, E., Vo, D., Wege, M., Whoriskey, F. G., Wilson, K. & Woodward, B., 5 Nov 2021, In: Frontiers in Marine Science. 8, 21 p., 751840.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Related by journal

  1. Frontiers in Marine Science (Journal)

    Ife Okafor-Yarwood (Reviewer)

    3 Sep 2020 → …

    Activity: Publication peer-review and editorial work typesPeer review of manuscripts

  2. Frontiers in Marine Science (Journal)

    Theoni Photopoulou (Member of editorial board)

    2017 → …

    Activity: Publication peer-review and editorial work typesPeer review of manuscripts

  3. Frontiers in Marine Science (Journal)

    Luke Edward Rendell (Member of editorial board)

    2015 → …

    Activity: Publication peer-review and editorial work typesEditor of research journal

ID: 262322303

Top