Deep-water calibration of echosounders used for biomass surveys and species identification

Acoustic quantification of aquatic biomass using echosounders requires accurate calibration. With the advancing applications of deep-water echosounders involving moored, towed, profiling and autonomous instruments, calibration of echosounders at the operating depth is needed to ensure unbiased estimates of biomass and species identification. In this context, the deepwater calibration acoustic facility (DeCAF) was used to examine the depth-dependent variations in on-axis gain (G0) and equivalent two-way beam angle (W) of three different transducers, operating at 38 (Simrad ES38-DD and MSI-38) and 120 kHz (Simrad ES120-7CD) used for biomass surveys and species identification. The analyses carried out using the sphere calibration method reveal significant variations in calibrated G0 and W that in combination could result in substantial systemic biases in quantitative biomass estimation and species identification. The depth-dependent G0 variations derived using the DeCAF system are in accordance with available deep-water calibration results, demonstrating reasonable repeatability of target strength measurements (60.6 dB) over the calibration deployments. Importantly, W of the transducers was calculated to be consistently lower than the values specified by the manufacturer, and for one transducer would result in 18% change in the estimated biomass. These results highlight the potential for bias if the W of transducer is not independently calculated using the actual survey echosounder.

[1]  Rudy J. Kloser,et al.  Deep-scattering layer, gas-bladder density, and size estimates using a two-frequency acoustic and optical probe , 2016 .

[2]  Rudy J. Kloser,et al.  Improved estimates of orange roughy biomass using an acoustic-optical system in commercial trawlnets , 2016 .

[3]  Matt Sherlock,et al.  Deep water acoustic calibration facility: Development of a platform , 2016, OCEANS 2016 - Shanghai.

[4]  Rudy J. Kloser,et al.  A profiling acoustic and optical system (pAOS) for pelagic studies; Prototype development and testing , 2016, OCEANS 2016 - Shanghai.

[5]  Mark A. Moline,et al.  Integration of Scientific Echo Sounders with an Adaptable Autonomous Vehicle to Extend Our Understanding of Animals from the Surface to the Bathypelagic , 2015 .

[6]  Olav Rune Godø,et al.  Synchronous behaviour of cetaceans observed with active acoustics , 2013 .

[7]  Olav Rune Godø,et al.  Towards an acoustic‐based coupled observation and modelling system for monitoring and predicting ecosystem dynamics of the open ocean , 2013 .

[8]  Rudy J. Kloser,et al.  Identification and target strength of orange roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus) measured in situ. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  J. Oeffner,et al.  In situ target strength estimates of optically verified southern blue whiting (Micromesistius australis) , 2013 .

[10]  John K. Horne,et al.  Measuring the vertical distributional variability of pelagic fauna in Monterey Bay , 2012 .

[11]  O. Godø,et al.  A revised target strength–length estimate for blue whiting (Micromesistius poutassou): implications for biomass estimates , 2011 .

[12]  M. Sherlock,et al.  A combined acoustic and optical instrument for fisheries studies , 2010, OCEANS'10 IEEE SYDNEY.

[13]  K.Y. Foo,et al.  Standard target calibration of broad-band active sonar systems in a laboratory tank , 2010, OCEANS'10 IEEE SYDNEY.

[14]  S. Kaartvedt,et al.  Use of bottom-mounted echo sounders in exploring behavior of mesopelagic fishes , 2009 .

[15]  H. Knudsen.  Long-term evaluation of scientific-echosounder performance , 2009 .

[16]  Rudy J. Kloser,et al.  Measurement and visual verification of fish target strength using an acoustic-optical system attached to a trawlnet , 2009 .

[17]  Olav Rune Godø,et al.  Ecological studies of marine mammals using a seabed-mounted echosounder , 2009 .

[18]  Rudy J. Kloser,et al.  Acoustic observations of micronekton fish on the scale of an ocean basin: potential and challenges , 2009 .

[19]  David A. Demer,et al.  Variations in echosounder -transducer performance with water temperature , 2008 .

[20]  Paul G. Fernandes,et al.  Proposals for the collection of multifrequency acoustic data , 2008 .

[21]  Audun Pedersen,et al.  Effects of nonlinear sound propagation in fisheries research , 2007 .

[22]  Andrew S. Brierley,et al.  Use of moored acoustic instruments to measure short‐term variability in abundance of Antarctic krill , 2006 .

[23]  K. Foote,et al.  Comparing two 38-kHz scientific echosounders , 2005 .

[24]  E. John Simmonds,et al.  Fisheries Acoustics: Theory and Practice , 2005 .

[25]  Robert Kieser,et al.  Definition of signal-to-noise ratio and its critical role in split-beam measurements , 2005 .

[26]  D. Demer.  An estimate of error for the CCAMLR 2000 survey estimate of krill biomass , 2004 .

[27]  Olav Rune Godø,et al.  Behaviour of herring (Clupea harengus L.) towards an approaching autonomous underwater vehicle , 2004 .

[28]  Ronald Pedersen,et al.  A comparative acoustic-abundance estimation of pelagic redfish ( Sebastes mentella ) from hull-mounted and deep-towed acoustic systems , 2003 .

[29]  E. Ona.  An expanded target-strength relationship for herring , 2003 .

[30]  F. Tichy,et al.  Non-linear effects in a 200-kHz sound beam and the consequences for target-strength measurement , 2003 .

[31]  Paul G. Fernandes,et al.  Autonomous underwater vehicles: future platforms for fisheries acoustics , 2003 .

[32]  Rudy J. Kloser,et al.  Species identification in deep water using multiple acoustic frequencies , 2002 .

[33]  Observation and explanation of systematic split-beam angle measurement errors , 2000 .

[34]  P. Reynisson.  Monitoring of equivalent beam angles of hull-mounted acoustic survey transducers in the period 1983-1995 , 1998 .

[35]  A. Brierley,et al.  Variations in echosounder calibration with temperature, and some possible implications for acoustic surveys of krill biomass , 1998 .

[36]  K. G. Foote,et al.  A technique for calibration of monostatic echosounder systems , 1996 .

[37]  Rudy J. Kloser.  Improved precision of acoustic surveys of benthopelagic fish by means of a deep-towed transducer , 1996 .

[38]  Kenneth G. Foote,et al.  SOME PITFALLS OF SHORT-RANGE STANDARD-TARGET CALIBRATION , 1996 .

[39]  Rudy J. Kloser,et al.  Acoustic assessment of the biomass of a spawning aggregation of orange roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus, Collett) off south-eastern Australia, 1990-93 , 1996 .

[40]  Olav Rune Godø,et al.  A stationary acoustic system for monitoring undisturbed and vessel affected fish behaviour , 1996 .

[41]  John Dalen,et al.  Deep towed vehicle for fish abundance estimation concept and testing , 1991 .

[42]  Egil Ona.  Optimal acoustic beam pattern corrections for split beam transducers , 1990 .

[43]  Egil Ona,et al.  Target tracking with a split-beam echo sounder , 1990 .

[44]  Egil Ona,et al.  Comparative analysis of split beam data , 1988 .

[45]  K. Foote.  Calibration of acoustic instruments for fish density estimation : a practical guide , 1987 .

[46]  DEPENDENCE OF EQUIVALENT BEAM ANGLE ON SOUND SPEED , 1987 .

[47]  Gudmund Vestnes,et al.  Direct measurements of equivalent beam angle on hull-mounted transducers , 1985 .

[48]  A comparison between measured and theoretical equivalent beam angles for seven similar transducers , 1984 .

[49]  Kenneth G. Foote,et al.  Comparison of copper and tungsten carbide calibration spheres , 1984 .

[50]  Robert J. Urick,et al.  Principles of underwater sound , 1975 .