The use of acoustic cameras in shallow waters: new hydroacoustic tools for monitoring migratory fish population. A review of DIDSON technology

European Union legislation, through the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/ EC), as well as national legislation, such as the ‘Grenelle Environnement’ (2007) in France, requires restoration of ecological connectivity in streams to improve free circulation of migratory fish. Different methods (e.g. capture by trap or net, telemetry, hydroacoustics) are used to evaluate the efficiency of fish passes to estimate the migratory species abundance and analyse changes in their within-river distributions. Among these methods, hydroacoustics is non-intrusive, allowing long-term observation and description of fish populations based on physical properties of sound in water. However, the main limit to hydroacoustic tools is their difficulty in identifying species. Initially designed for military purposes, dual-frequency identification sonar (DIDSON) has been used in environmental management for a decade. This acoustic camera uses higher frequencies and more sub-beams than common hydroacoustic tools, which improves image resolution and then enables observation of fish morphology and swimming behaviour. The ability to subtract static echoes from echograms and directly measure fish length improve the species-identification process. However, some limits have been identified, such as automatic dataset recording and the low range of the detection beam, which decreases accuracy, but efficient tools are now being developed to improve the accuracy of data recording (morphology, species identification, direction and speed). The new technological properties of acoustic cameras, such as the video-like visualization of the data, have greatly improved monitoring of diadromous fish populations (abundance, distribution and behaviour), helping river and fisheries managers and researchers in making decisions.

[1]  Jiangang Luo,et al.  Using dual-frequency sonar to detect juvenile goliath grouper Epinephelus itajara in mangrove habitat , 2009 .

[2]  Patrice Brehmer,et al.  New applications of hydroacoustic methods for monitoring shallow water aquatic ecosystems: the case of mussel culture grounds , 2003 .

[3]  P. Madsen,et al.  Allis shad (Alosa alosa) exhibit an intensity-graded behavioral response when exposed to ultrasound. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  D. Eggers.  On the Discrimination of Sockeye and Chinook Salmon in the Kenai River Based on Target Strength Determined with 420 kHz Dual-Beam Sonar , 1994 .

[5]  F. Gerlotto,et al.  Experiences with multibeam sonar in shallow tropical waters , 1998 .

[6]  P. Brehmer,et al.  Fisheries Acoustics: Theory and Practice, 2nd edn , 2006 .

[7]  K. Cochrane,et al.  Ecosystem approach to fisheries: a review of implementation guidelines , 2005 .

[8]  J. Horne.  The influence of ontogeny, physiology, and behaviour on the target strength of walleye pollock (Theragra chalcogramma) , 2003 .

[9]  A. Elferink,et al.  Acoustic Pollution in the Oceans: The Search for Legal Standards , 2000 .

[10]  Gene R. Ploskey,et al.  Responses of Blueback Herring to High-Frequency Sound and Implications for Reducing Entrainment at Hydropower Dams , 1992 .

[11]  Iain D. Couzin,et al.  The Dynamics of Coordinated Group Hunting and Collective Information Transfer among Schooling Prey , 2012, Current Biology.

[12]  Arthur A. Myrberg,et al.  The effects of man-made noise on the behavior of marine animals , 1990 .

[13]  E. Josse,et al.  Comparison of vertical mobile hydroacoustic survey strategies for monitoring fish distributions in the Gironde estuary (France) , 2013 .

[14]  P. Alexandrino,et al.  The allis shad Alosa alosa: Biology, ecology, range, and status of populations , 2003 .

[15]  Kenneth G. Foote,et al.  Acoustic Methods: Brief Review and Prospects for Advancing Fisheries Research , 2009 .

[16]  M. Sissenwine,et al.  Is MSY an Adequate Foundation for Optimum Yield , 1978 .

[17]  S. Hughes.  A mobile horizontal hydroacoustic fisheries survey of the River Thames, United Kingdom , 1998 .

[18]  K. Foote.  Importance of the swimbladder in acoustic scattering by fish: A comparison of gadoid and mackerel target strengths , 1980 .

[19]  R. H. Love.  Dorsal‐Aspect Target Strength of an Individual Fish , 1971 .

[20]  D. Pavlov,et al.  Hydroacoustic study of Salmo Salar migration in the Shuya River (Onega Lake Basin) , 2011, Journal of Ichthyology.

[21]  F. Darchambeau,et al.  Is the fishery of the introduced Tanganyika sardine (Limnothrissa miodon) in Lake Kivu (East Africa) sustainable , 2012 .

[22]  Laura M. Kracker,et al.  Hydroacoustic surveys: a non-destructive approach to monitoring fish distributions at National Marine Sanctuaries , 2007 .

[23]  Jean-Luc Baglinière,et al.  Interannual changes in recruitment of the Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) population in the River Oir (Lower Normandy, France): relationships with spawners and in-stream habitat , 2005 .

[24]  J. Frouz,et al.  Target strength of some European fish species and its dependence on fish body parameters , 2005 .

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

[26]  T. Stanton.  30 years of advances in active bioacoustics: A personal perspective , 2012 .

[27]  J. Holmes,et al.  Accuracy and precision of fish-count data from a “dual-frequency identification sonar” (DIDSON) imaging system , 2006 .

[28]  P. Bach,et al.  Exploratory and Instantaneous Swimming Speeds of Amphidromous Fish School in Shallow-Water Coastal Lagoon Channels , 2011 .

[29]  B. H. Ransom,et al.  Comparison of hydroacoustic and net catch estimates of Pacific salmon smolt (Oncorhynchus spp.) passage at hydropower dams in the Columbia River Basin, USA , 1996 .

[30]  P. Blondel.  Shallow-water environments , 2009 .

[31]  Pierre Fréon,et al.  From two dimensions to three: the use of multibeam sonar for a new approach in fisheries acoustics , 1999 .

[32]  Warren L. J. Fox,et al.  Dual-frequency acoustic camera: a candidate for an obstacle avoidance, gap-filler, and identification sensor for untethered underwater vehicles , 2002, OCEANS '02 MTS/IEEE.

[33]  J. Gregory,et al.  Avoidance behaviour of Alosa fallax fallax to pulsed ultrasound and its potential as a technique for monitoring clupeid spawning migration in a shallow river , 2003 .

[34]  T. Shardlow.  Using Time-Lapsed Video to Estimate Survey Life for Area-under-the-Curve Methods of Escapement Estimation , 2004 .

[35]  C. Walters,et al.  Possible ecosystem impacts of applying MSY policies from single-species assessment , 2005 .

[36]  J. Kubečka,et al.  Acoustic size vs. real size relationships for common species of riverine fish , 1998 .

[37]  Jin Zhang,et al.  The Survey of Fishery Resources and Spatial Distribution Using DIDSON Imaging Sonar Data , 2012, CCTA.

[38]  T. Mulligan,et al.  Classifying Sonar Images: Can a Computer-Driven Process Identify Eels? , 2008 .

[39]  John K. Horne,et al.  Models, measures, and visualizations of fish backscatter , 2005 .

[40]  J. Karr.  Biological Integrity: A Long-Neglected Aspect of Water Resource Management. , 1991, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[41]  J. Holmes,et al.  Optimizing sampling effort within a systematic design for estimating abundant escapement of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in their natal river , 2008 .

[42]  K. Rose.  WHY ARE QUANTITATIVE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND FISH POPULATIONS SO ELUSIVE , 2000 .

[43]  David W. Daum,et al.  Use of Fixed-Location, Split-Beam Sonar to Describe Temporal and Spatial Patterns of Adult Fall Chum Salmon Migration in the Chandalar River, Alaska , 1998 .

[44]  2011 Teslin River DIDSON Sonar Feasibility Study , 2012 .

[45]  Alexis Chaigneau,et al.  Acoustic Observation of Living Organisms Reveals the Upper Limit of the Oxygen Minimum Zone , 2010, PloS one.

[46]  Jost Borcherding,et al.  Can acoustic shadows identify fish species? A novel application of imaging sonar data , 2012 .

[47]  Jun Han,et al.  Automated acoustic method for counting and sizing farmed fish during transfer using DIDSON , 2009, Fisheries Science.

[48]  Daily migration cycles of fish populations in a tropical estuary (Sine-Saloum, Senegal) using a horizontal-directed split-beam transducer and multibeam sonar , 1998 .

[49]  R. H. Love.  Target strength of an individual fish at any aspect , 1977 .

[50]  P. Brehmer,et al.  Survey boat effect on YOY fish schools in a pre‐alpine lake: evidence from multibeam sonar and split‐beam echosounder data , 2010 .

[51]  J. Guillard,et al.  Influences of a dam on Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) upstream migration in the Couesnon River (Mont Saint Michel Bay) using hydroacoustics , 2013 .

[52]  M. Perga,et al.  Hydroacoustic assessment of young‐of‐year perch, Perca fluviatilis, population dynamics in an oligotrophic lake (Lake Annecy, France) , 2006 .

[53]  Tuomo Rossi,et al.  Simulation and experimental measurement of side-aspect target strength of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) at high frequency , 2004 .

[54]  J. Vaganay,et al.  Ship hull inspection by hull-relative navigation and control , 2005, Proceedings of OCEANS 2005 MTS/IEEE.

[55]  E. O. Belcher,et al.  Object identification with acoustic lenses , 2001, MTS/IEEE Oceans 2001. An Ocean Odyssey. Conference Proceedings (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37295).

[56]  Jean-Marc Fromentin,et al.  Ecosystem oceanography for global change in fisheries. , 2008, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[57]  Kevin M. Boswell,et al.  Tail-Beat Patterns in Dual-Frequency Identification Sonar Echograms and their Potential Use for Species Identification and Bioenergetics Studies , 2010 .

[58]  J. Hughes.  Combining Count Data from Split-beam and Multiple DIDSON Sonar Techniques to Estimate Spawning Run Abundance of Anadromous Fishes in the Roanoke River, NC. , 2012 .

[59]  Steven J. Fleischman,et al.  Time-based signal characteristics as predictors of fish size and species for a side-looking hydroacoustic application in a river , 2003 .

[60]  Kerrie A. Pipal,et al.  Operation of Dual-Frequency Identification Sonar (Didson) to Monitor Adult Steelhead (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) in the Central California Coast , 2013 .

[61]  David Mouillot,et al.  Amphidromous fish school migration revealed by combining fixed sonar monitoring (horizontal beaming) with fishing data , 2006 .

[62]  Karin E. Limburg,et al.  Dramatic Declines in North Atlantic Diadromous Fishes , 2009 .

[63]  Investigations of spawning migration and assessment of abundance of the Kamchatka steelhead (Parasalmo mykiss) from the Utkholok River by means of Didson dual-frequency identification sonar , 2009, Journal of Ichthyology.

[64]  E. Verspoor,et al.  The Atlantic salmon : genetics, conservation and management , 2007 .

[65]  J. Guillard,et al.  First results on migrating shad (Alosa fallax) and mullet (Mugil cephalus) echocounting in a lock on the Rhône River (France) using a split-beam sounder, and relationships with environmental data and fish caught , 2000 .

[66]  Shing Yip Lee,et al.  Use of PIT tag and underwater video recording in assessing estuarine fish movement in a high intertidal mangrove and salt marsh creek , 2008 .

[67]  Ultrasound detection by clupeiform fishes , 2001 .

[68]  Stratis Georgakarakos,et al.  The application of multibeam sonar technology for quantitative estimates of fish density in shallow water acoustic surveys , 2000 .

[69]  P. Sibley,et al.  The decline of the European eel Anguilla anguilla: quantifying and managing escapement to support conservation. , 2011, Journal of fish biology.

[70]  Results of the February-April 2005 echo integration-trawl surveys of Walleye pollock (Theragra chalcogramma) conducted in the Gulf of Alaska, cruises MF2005-01 and MF2005-05 , 2006 .

[71]  Simple Size-Structured Models of Recruitment and Harvest in Pacific Salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) , 1994 .

[72]  J. Bigot,et al.  Evidence of a variable “unsampled” pelagic fish biomass in shallow water (<20 m): the case of the Gulf of Lion , 2006 .

[73]  P. Almeida.  Estuarine movement patterns of adult thin-lipped grey mullet, Liza ramada (Risso) (Pisces, Mugilidae), observed by ultrasonic tracking , 1996 .

[74]  John K. Horne,et al.  Acoustic approaches to remote species identification: a review , 2000 .

[75]  Verena M. Trenkel,et al.  Underwater acoustics for ecosystem-based management: state of the science and proposals for ecosystem indicators , 2011 .

[76]  Christophe Collet,et al.  Omnidirectional multibeam sonar monitoring: applications in fisheries science , 2006 .

[77]  D. Mouillot,et al.  Field investigations and multi-indicators for shallow water lagoon management: perspective for societal benefit , 2011 .

[78]  J. Kubečka,et al.  Patchiness of longitudinal fish distributions in a river as revealed by a continuous hydroacoustic survey , 1996 .

[79]  Juha Lilja,et al.  Side-aspect target strength of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), brown trout (Salmo trutta), whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus), and pike (Esox lucius) , 2000 .

[80]  Martyn C. Lucas,et al.  Methods for studying spatial behaviour of freshwater fishes in the natural environment , 2000 .

[81]  C. Jouanin,et al.  Climate change may have affected growth and life history of Atlantic salmon juveniles over the last 30 years , 2007 .

[82]  E. Jeppesen,et al.  Strong correspondence between gillnet catch per unit effort and hydroacoustically derived fish biomass in stratified lakes , 2012 .

[83]  G. Evanno,et al.  Natural recolonization of the Seine River by Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) of multiple origins. , 2010 .

[84]  M. Simier,et al.  Spatio-temporal variability of fish assemblages in the Gambia estuary (West Africa) observed by two vertical hydroacoustic methods : moored and mobile sampling , 2004 .

[85]  Kresimir Williams,et al.  Automated tracking of fish in trawls using the DIDSON (Dual frequency IDentification SONar) , 2008 .

[86]  Estimates of Chinook Salmon Abundance in the Kenai River Using Dual-beam Sonar, 1993 , 1995 .

[87]  D. Eggleston,et al.  The Identification, Conservation, and Management of Estuarine and Marine Nurseries for Fish and Invertebrates , 2001 .

[88]  Debby L. Burwen,et al.  Mixture models for the species apportionment of hydroacoustic data, with echo-envelope length as the discriminatory variable , 2003 .

[89]  Lars G. Rudstam,et al.  Can stationary bottom split-beam hydroacoustics be used to measure fish swimming speed in situ? , 2000 .

[90]  L. Dagorn,et al.  An acoustic approach to study tuna aggregated around fish aggregating devices in French Polynesia: methods and validation , 1999 .

[91]  J. Guillard,et al.  Preliminary results of fish population distribution in a Senegalese coastal area with depths less than 15 m, using acoustic methods , 1998 .

[92]  J. H. Cowan,et al.  Evaluation of target strength–fish length equation choices for estimating estuarine fish biomass , 2008, Hydrobiologia.

[93]  G. Bornette,et al.  Connectivity and biocomplexity in waterbodies of riverine floodplains , 2002 .

[94]  Hermann J. Enzenhofer,et al.  Fixed-location riverine hydroacoustics as a method of enumerating migrating adult Pacific salmon: comparison of split-beam acoustics vs. visual counting , 1998 .

[95]  J. H. Cowan,et al.  Evaluating the effect of slot size and environmental variables on the passage of estuarine nekton through a water control structure , 2010 .

[96]  Myounghee Kang,et al.  Semiautomated Analysis of Data from an Imaging Sonar for Fish Counting, Sizing, and Tracking in a Post-Processing Application , 2011 .

[97]  P. Auster,et al.  Use of High-Resolution DIDSON Sonar to Quantify Attributes of Predation at Ecologically Relevant Space and Time Scales , 2013 .

[98]  Laurent Berger,et al.  The new fisheries multibeam echosounder ME70: description and expected contribution to fisheries research , 2008 .

[99]  P. Dahl,et al.  Measurement of fish target strength and associated directivity at high frequencies , 1983 .

[100]  Robert P. Mueller,et al.  Video and acoustic camera techniques for studying fish under ice: a review and comparison , 2006, Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries.

[101]  Milan Říha,et al.  Use of high-frequency imaging sonar (DIDSON) to observe fish behaviour towards a surface trawl , 2012 .

[102]  M. Simier,et al.  Fish biomass estimates along estuaries: A comparison of vertical acoustic sampling at fixed stations and purse seine catches , 2012 .

[103]  Paul W. Webb,et al.  Locomotor Patterns in the Evolution of Actinopterygian Fishes , 1982 .

[104]  Dezhang Chu,et al.  Protocols for calibrating multibeam sonar. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[105]  Peter A. Fox,et al.  Adaption of the M3 multi-beam sonar to fisheries a , 2012 .

[106]  J. B. James,et al.  Assessment of fish populations in still waters using hydroacoustics and survey gill netting: Experiences with Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) in the UK , 2009 .

[107]  T. Mehner,et al.  Temperature-related nocturnal vertical segregation of coexisting coregonids , 2010 .

[108]  Robert Kieser,et al.  A split-beam echo-counting model for riverine use , 1996 .

[109]  J. Baglinière.  Introduction: The brown trout (Salmo trutta L)—its origin, distribution and economic and scientific significance , 1999 .

[110]  R. F. Coombs,et al.  A re-evaluation of relationships between fish size, acoustic frequency, and target strength , 1996 .

[111]  Juha Lilja,et al.  Spawning run of Atlantic Salmon ( Salmo salar ) in the River Tornionjoki monitored by horizontal split-beam echosounding , 2000 .

[112]  K. Boswell,et al.  Characterization of Atlantic Cod Spawning Habitat and Behavior in Icelandic Coastal Waters , 2012, PloS one.

[113]  Dennis J. Dunning,et al.  Alewives Avoid High-Frequency Sound , 1992 .

[114]  Erwan Josse,et al.  Typology and behaviour of tuna aggregations around fish aggregating devices from acoustic surveys in French Polynesia , 2000 .

[115]  E. Verspoor,et al.  The Atlantic Salmon , 2007 .

[116]  E. Ona,et al.  Hydroacoustic monitoring of fish in sea cages: target strength (TS) measurements on Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) , 2004 .