Evaluating and optimising performance of multi‐species call recognisers for ecoacoustic restoration monitoring

Abstract Monitoring the effect of ecosystem restoration can be difficult and time‐consuming. Autonomous sensors, such as acoustic recorders, can aid monitoring across long time scales. This project successfully developed, tested and implemented call recognisers for eight species of frog in the Murray–Darling Basin. Recognisers for all but one species performed well and substantially better than many species recognisers reported in the literature. We achieved this through a comprehensive development phase, which carefully considered and refined the representativeness of training data, as well as the construction (amplitude cut‐off) and the similarity thresholds (score cut‐offs) of each call template used. Recogniser performance was high for almost all species examined. Recognisers for Crinia signifera, Limnodynastes fletcherii, Limnodynastes dumerilii, Litoria peronii and Crinia parinsignifera all performed well, with most templates having receiver operating characteristics values (the proportion of true positive and true negatives) over 0.7, and some much higher. Recognisers for L. peronii, L. fletcherii and L. dumerilii performed particularly well in the training data set, which allowed for responses to environmental watering events, a restoration activity, to be clearly observed. While slightly more involved than building recognisers using commercial packages, the workflows ensure that a high‐quality recogniser can be built and the performance fine‐tuned using multiple parameters. Using the same framework, recognisers can be improved on in future iterations. We believe that multi‐species recognisers are a highly effective and precise way to detect the effects of ecosystem restoration.

[1]  P. Somervuo,et al.  Domain‐specific neural networks improve automated bird sound recognition already with small amount of local data , 2022, Methods in Ecology and Evolution.

[2]  D. Watson,et al.  Acoustic restoration: Using soundscapes to benchmark and fast‐track recovery of ecological communities , 2022, Ecology letters.

[3]  S. Linke,et al.  Fledge or fail: Nest monitoring of endangered black-cockatoos using bioacoustics and open-source call recognition , 2022, Ecol. Informatics.

[4]  C. Sayer,et al.  Ecoacoustics as a novel tool for assessing pond restoration success: Results of a pilot study , 2021, Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.

[5]  Jake E. Bicknell,et al.  Spatial replication and habitat context matters for assessments of tropical biodiversity using acoustic indices , 2020 .

[6]  Paul Roe,et al.  Automated species identification of frog choruses in environmental recordings using acoustic indices , 2020 .

[7]  Juan Lavista Ferres,et al.  Multispecies bioacoustic classification using transfer learning of deep convolutional neural networks with pseudo-labeling , 2020 .

[8]  Nicholas P. Leseberg,et al.  Using intrinsic and contextual information associated with automated signal detections to improve call recognizer performance: A case study using the cryptic and critically endangered Night Parrot Pezoporus occidentalis , 2020, Methods in Ecology and Evolution.

[9]  P. Roe,et al.  Acoustic monitoring reveals year-round calling by invasive toads in tropical Australia , 2020 .

[10]  Louis Ranjard,et al.  Assemblage of Focal Species Recognizers—AFSR: A technique for decreasing false indications of presence from acoustic automatic identification in a multiple species context , 2019, PloS one.

[11]  Wilson J. Wright,et al.  Modelling misclassification in multi‐species acoustic data when estimating occupancy and relative activity , 2019, Methods in Ecology and Evolution.

[12]  Zachary J. Ruff,et al.  Automated identification of avian vocalizations with deep convolutional neural networks , 2019, Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation.

[13]  D. Ryder,et al.  Monitoring of environmental flow outcomes in a large river basin: The Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder's long‐term intervention in the Murray–Darling Basin, Australia , 2019, River Research and Applications.

[14]  Nils Bunnefeld,et al.  Guidelines for the use of acoustic indices in environmental research , 2019, Methods in Ecology and Evolution.

[15]  M. Maron,et al.  Bioacoustic monitoring of animal vocal behavior for conservation , 2019, Conservation Science and Practice.

[16]  Aristóteles,et al.  Historia animalium , 2019 .

[17]  S. Linke,et al.  Ecoacoustics can detect ecosystem responses to environmental water allocations , 2019, Freshwater Biology.

[18]  Margot Brereton,et al.  Acoustic detection and acoustic habitat characterisation of the critically endangered white‐bellied heron (Ardea insignis) in Bhutan , 2018, Freshwater Biology.

[19]  Kate E. Jones,et al.  Emerging opportunities and challenges for passive acoustics in ecological assessment and monitoring , 2018, Methods in Ecology and Evolution.

[20]  N. Butler,et al.  Soundscapes as a surrogate measure of vegetation condition for biodiversity values: A pilot study , 2018, Ecological Indicators.

[21]  DelWayne R. Bohnenstiehl,et al.  Investigating the utility of ecoacoustic metrics in marine soundscapes , 2018 .

[22]  George Wittemyer,et al.  Efficacy of extracting indices from large‐scale acoustic recordings to monitor biodiversity , 2018, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[23]  Stephen Marsland,et al.  Automated birdsong recognition in complex acoustic environments: a review , 2018 .

[24]  G. Dutilleux,et al.  Automated acoustic monitoring of endangered common spadefoot toad populations reveals patterns of vocal activity , 2018 .

[25]  Helena Titheridge,et al.  Biases of acoustic indices measuring biodiversity in urban areas , 2017 .

[26]  Erin M. Bayne,et al.  Recommendations for acoustic recognizer performance assessment with application to five common automated signal recognition programs , 2017 .

[27]  Jeff Houlahan,et al.  Designing better frog call recognition models , 2017, Ecology and evolution.

[28]  Steve Kelling,et al.  Towards the Automatic Classification of Avian Flight Calls for Bioacoustic Monitoring , 2016, PloS one.

[29]  Christian C. Voigt,et al.  The use of automated identification of bat echolocation calls in acoustic monitoring: A cautionary note for a sound analysis , 2016 .

[30]  Therese M. Donovan,et al.  Tools for automated acoustic monitoring within the R package monitoR , 2016 .

[31]  Therese M. Donovan,et al.  Assessment of Error Rates in Acoustic Monitoring with the R package monitoR , 2016 .

[32]  Alan E. Burger,et al.  Testing the effectiveness of automated acoustic sensors for monitoring vocal activity of Marbled Murrelets Brachyramphus marmoratus , 2015 .

[33]  J. Sueur,et al.  Ecoacoustics: the Ecological Investigation and Interpretation of Environmental Sound , 2015, Biosemiotics.

[34]  Patricia W. Freeman,et al.  The Problem of Low Agreement among Automated Identification Programs for Acoustical Surveys of Bats , 2015 .

[35]  Amina E. Price,et al.  Improving Ecological Response Monitoring of Environmental Flows , 2015, Environmental Management.

[36]  Nadia Pieretti,et al.  Acoustic Indices for Biodiversity Assessment and Landscape Investigation , 2014 .

[37]  Qiang Jiang,et al.  Water Planning and Hydro-Climatic Change in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia , 2014, AMBIO.

[38]  Paul Roe,et al.  A toolbox for animal call recognition , 2012 .

[39]  T. Scott Brandes,et al.  Automated sound recording and analysis techniques for bird surveys and conservation , 2008, Bird Conservation International.

[40]  B. L. Lamb,et al.  Detecting biological responses to flow management: missed opportunities; future directions , 2008 .

[41]  K. Zou,et al.  Receiver-Operating Characteristic Analysis for Evaluating Diagnostic Tests and Predictive Models , 2007, Circulation.

[42]  Stefan Kahl,et al.  BirdNET: A deep learning solution for avian diversity monitoring , 2021, Ecol. Informatics.

[43]  Paul Roe,et al.  Using visualization and machine learning methods to monitor low detectability species - The least bittern as a case study , 2020, Ecol. Informatics.

[44]  S. Linke,et al.  Six steps towards operationalising freshwater ecoacoustic monitoring , 2019 .

[45]  Thierry Aubin,et al.  Screening large audio datasets to determine the time and space distribution of Screaming Piha birds in a tropical forest , 2016, Ecol. Informatics.