Buzzfindr: Automating the detection of feeding buzzes in bat echolocation recordings

Quantification of bat communities and habitat heavily rely on non-invasive acoustic bat surveys the scope of which has greatly amplified with advances in remote monitoring technologies. Despite the unprecedented amount of acoustic data being collected, analysis of these data is often limited to simple species classification which provides little information on habitat function. Feeding buzzes, the rapid sequences of echolocation pulses emitted by bats during the terminal phase of prey capture, have historically been used to evaluate foraging habitat quality. Automated identification of feeding buzzes in recordings could benefit conservation by helping identify critical foraging habitat. I tested if detection of feeding buzzes in recordings could be automated with bat recordings from Ontario, Canada. Data were obtained using three different recording devices. The signal detection method involved sequentially scanning narrow frequency bands with the "Bioacoustics" R package signal detection algorithm, and extracting temporal and signal strength parameters from detections. Buzzes were best characterized by the standard deviation of the time between consecutive pulses, the average pulse duration, and the average pulse signal-to-noise ratio. Classification accuracy was highest with artificial neural networks and random forest algorithms. I compared each model's receiver operating characteristic curves and random forest provided better control over the false-positive rate so it was retained as the final model. When tested on a new dataset, buzzfindr's overall accuracy was 93.4% (95% CI: 91.5%- 94.9%). Overall accuracy was not affected by recording device type or species frequency group. Automated detection of feeding buzzes will facilitate their integration in the analytical workflow of acoustic bat studies to improve inferences on habitat use and quality.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2024-08-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306063
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Bat Biology and Ecology Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.15
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Buzzfindr: Automating the detection of feeding buzzes in bat echolocation recordings

Joël W. Jameson
5 citations
PLoS ONE
Bat Biology and Ecology Studies
5.15
article

Buzzfindr: Automating the detection of feeding buzzes in bat echolocation recordings

Joël W. Jameson
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Quantification of bat communities and habitat heavily rely on non-invasive acoustic bat surveys the scope of which has greatly amplified with advances in remote monitoring technologies. Despite the unprecedented amount of acoustic data being collected, analysis of these data is often limited to simple species classification which provides little information on habitat function. Feeding buzzes, the rapid sequences of echolocation pulses emitted by bats during the terminal phase of prey capture, have historically been used to evaluate foraging habitat quality. Automated identification of feeding buzzes in recordings could benefit conservation by helping identify critical foraging habitat. I tested if detection of feeding buzzes in recordings could be automated with bat recordings from Ontario, Canada. Data were obtained using three different recording devices. The signal detection method involved sequentially scanning narrow frequency bands with the "Bioacoustics" R package signal detection algorithm, and extracting temporal and signal strength parameters from detections. Buzzes were best characterized by the standard deviation of the time between consecutive pulses, the average pulse duration, and the average pulse signal-to-noise ratio. Classification accuracy was highest with artificial neural networks and random forest algorithms. I compared each model's receiver operating characteristic curves and random forest provided better control over the false-positive rate so it was retained as the final model. When tested on a new dataset, buzzfindr's overall accuracy was 93.4% (95% CI: 91.5%- 94.9%). Overall accuracy was not affected by recording device type or species frequency group. Automated detection of feeding buzzes will facilitate their integration in the analytical workflow of acoustic bat studies to improve inferences on habitat use and quality.

PLoS ONEVol. 19(8)
WSP (Canada) (CA)
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Bat Biology and Ecology Studies
5.15
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.