Article Figures & Tables
Figures
- Fig. 2.
Mean hearing thresholds of Cyprinus carpio (solid lines) under laboratory conditions (baseline) and in the presence of the different ambient noise types. Broken lines show the cepstrum-smoothed sound power spectra of the corresponding noise types (Fig. 1 shows the absolute amplitude spectra). DR, Danube river; TS, Triesting stream; BW, backwater; LN, Lake Neusiedl.
- Table 1.
Hearing threshold values of C. carpio and P. fluviatilis measured under the different background noise conditions
Hearing threshold (dB re 1 μPa) Fish Frequency (kHz) Lab-noise BW LN TS DR C. carpio 0.1 76.2±0.65 79.3±0.61 85.0±0.45 92.3±0.95 97.8±0.87 0.3 66.3±0.99 73.2±0.31 73.7±1.45 88 3±1.38 96.8±1.30 0.5 60.3±0.49 64.2±0.54 67.3±0.80 82.0±0.86 95.2±2.70 0.8 57.0±0.45 66.0±0.68 68.8±0.65 89.2±0.91 105.8±0.48 1.0 57.3±0.61 66.7±0.67 69.2±0.65 87.8±0.83 106.2±0.54 2.0 81.8±0.54 90.0±0.68 88.0±0.86 102.5±1.18 118.5±0.96 3.0 99.7±0.71 104.5±1.12 108.8±0.54 113.3±0.56 122.0±1.00 4.0 112.2±0.65 114.0±0.52 114.7±0.33 120.2±0.91 123.3±0.76 P. fluviatilis 0.1 87.7±0.42 89.5±0.34 93.8±0.65 96.5±0.86 100.2±0.87 0.2 81.7±0.56 88.2±1.49 86.2±0.95 88.2±1.49 92.7±1.28 0.3 83.7±0.30 88.0±1.07 87.8±0.98 87.5±1.18 91.2±0.91 0.5 100.0±0.37 100.7±0.71 104.2±0.91 102.0±1.10 105.2±0.79 0.8 106.3±0.80 112.7±1.12 111.5±0.96 111.3±0.67 114.8±0.79 1.0 110.2±0.87 114.0±0.63 112.0±1.03 116.5±1.43 118.7±0.99 -
Lab-noise, baseline audiogram; BW, backwater; DR, Danube River; LN, Lake Neusiedl; TS, Triesting stream.
Values are means ± s.e.m. (N=6).
-
- Table 2.
Threshold shift for C. carpio and P. fluviatilis with the baseline audiogram as reference level
Threshold shift (dB) Fish Frequency (kHz) BW LN TS DR C. carpio 0.1 3.2±1.05 8.8±0.95 16.2±0.87 21.7±1.50 0.3 6.8±0.87 7.3±1.31 22.0±1.24 30.5±1.23 0.5 3.8±0.75 7.0±1.15 21.7±0.71 34.8±1.08 0.8 9.0±0.52 11.8±0.60 32.2±1.05 48.8±0.79 1.0 9.3±0.80 11.8±1.05 30.5±1.18 48.8±0.48 2.0 8.2±0.95 6.2±1.11 20.7±1.61 36.7±0.80 3.0 4.8±0.79 9.2±0.79 13.7±0.95 22.3±0.80 4.0 1.8±0.98 2.5±0.81 8.0±0.77 11.2±0.79 P. fluviatilis 0.1 1.8±0.48 7.2±1.25 8.8±0.60 12.5±0.99 0.2 6.5±1.26 4.7±1.17 6.5±1.50 11.0±1.48 0.3 4.3±1.12 4.5±1.18 4.5±1.20 7.5±1.06 0.5 0.0±1.00 4.0±0.89 2.0±1.06 5.2±0.75 0.8 6.3±1.05 5.0±0.97 5.0±1.24 8.5±1.23 1.0 3.8±0.48 1.8±1.17 6.3±1.63 8.5±1.57 -
BW, backwater; DR, Danube River; LN, Lake Neusiedl; TS, Triesting stream.
Values are means ± s.e.m. (N=6).
-
- Fig. 3.
Differences in hearing thresholds between the baseline audiogram of C. carpio and the masked audiograms. Values are means ± s.e.m. (N=6). Colours indicate the differences for the respective habitats according to Fig. 1. Blue, Danube river; red, Triesting stream; green, backwater; orange, Lake Neusiedl.
- Fig. 4.
Mean hearing thresholds of Perca fluviatilis (solid lines) under laboratory conditions (baseline) and in the presence of the different ambient noise types. Broken lines show the cepstrum-smoothed sound power spectra of the corresponding habitat noise (Fig. 1 shows the absolute amplitude spectra). DR, Danube river; TS, Triesting stream; BW, backwater; LN, Lake Neusiedl.
- Fig. 5.
Differences hearing thresholds between the baseline audiogram of P. fluviatilis and the masked audiograms. Values are means ± s.e.m. (N=6). Colours indicate the differences for the respective habitats according to Fig. 4. Blue, Danube river; red, Triesting stream; green, backwater; orange, Lake Neusiedl.
- Fig. 6.
Threshold-to-noise ratios for masked thresholds of (A) C. carpio (T/N-ratio = signal frequency×0.0093+9.14, r=0.789, P<0.001) and (B) P. fluviatilis (T/N-ratio = signal frequency ×0.0214+20.128, r=0.456, P<0.001). Colours indicate the T/N ratios for the respective habitats according to Fig. 1.
Article navigation
Related articles
Cited by...
More in this TOC section
Similar articles
Other journals from The Company of Biologists
Predicting the Future: Species Survival in a Changing World
Read our new special issue exploring the significant role of experimental biology in assessing and predicting the susceptibility or resilience of species to future, human-induced environmental change.
Adam Hardy wins the 2020 Journal of Experimental Biology Outstanding Paper Prize
Congratulations to winner Adam Hardy for his work showing that goby fins are as touch sensitive as primate fingertips. Read Adam’s paper and find out more about the 12 papers nominated for the award.
Stark trade-offs and elegant solutions in arthropod visual systems
Many elegant eye specializations that evolved in response to visual challenges continue to be discovered. A new Review by Meece et al. summarises exciting solutions evolved by insects and other arthropods in response to specific visual challenges.
Head bobbing gives pigeons a sense of perspective
Pigeons might look goofy with their head-bobbing walk, but it turns out that the ungainly head manoeuvre allows the birds to judge distance.