Species Specificity in Fish Sounds: Evidence, Limits and Methodological Implications

ABSTRACT Acoustic communication is now recognised as a widespread and functionally important component of fish behaviour. However, its evolutionary interpretation remains fragmented, as different types of acoustic signals are not interpreted with the same level of confidence. In particular, sounds recorded under disturbance or from hand‐held individuals are widely used in comparative studies but remain debated in evolutionary contexts. Here, we re‐examine these limitations by reviewing empirical, mechanistic and behavioural evidence across a wide range of teleost taxa. We show that interspecific acoustic differences are not restricted to reproductive contexts and that sounds obtained under disturbance can reflect intrinsic species‐level properties of neural control, musculature and sound‐producing structures. At the same time, we highlight that acoustic species specificity has not been demonstrated as a general rule across fishes, nor does sound alone constitute a universal prezygotic barrier. By integrating behavioural context, sound‐production mechanisms and recording methodologies, this review provides a framework to interpret acoustic variation in an evolutionary context and clarifies the scope, limits and evolutionary relevance of different acoustic datasets.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Fish and Fisheries
Published
2026-05-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.70093
Primary Topic
Marine animal studies overview
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Species Specificity in Fish Sounds: Evidence, Limits and Methodological Implications

Eric Parmentier, Marine Banse
Fish and Fisheries
Marine animal studies overview
article

Species Specificity in Fish Sounds: Evidence, Limits and Methodological Implications

Eric Parmentier, Marine Banse
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Acoustic communication is now recognised as a widespread and functionally important component of fish behaviour. However, its evolutionary interpretation remains fragmented, as different types of acoustic signals are not interpreted with the same level of confidence. In particular, sounds recorded under disturbance or from hand‐held individuals are widely used in comparative studies but remain debated in evolutionary contexts. Here, we re‐examine these limitations by reviewing empirical, mechanistic and behavioural evidence across a wide range of teleost taxa. We show that interspecific acoustic differences are not restricted to reproductive contexts and that sounds obtained under disturbance can reflect intrinsic species‐level properties of neural control, musculature and sound‐producing structures. At the same time, we highlight that acoustic species specificity has not been demonstrated as a general rule across fishes, nor does sound alone constitute a universal prezygotic barrier. By integrating behavioural context, sound‐production mechanisms and recording methodologies, this review provides a framework to interpret acoustic variation in an evolutionary context and clarifies the scope, limits and evolutionary relevance of different acoustic datasets.

Fish and Fisheries
University of Liège (BE)
Fonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRS
Life below water
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Marine animal studies overview
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.