Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Accepted manuscripts
    • Issue in progress
    • Latest complete issue
    • Issue archive
    • Archive by article type
    • Special issues
    • Subject collections
    • Interviews
    • Sign up for alerts
  • About us
    • About JEB
    • Editors and Board
    • Editor biographies
    • Travelling Fellowships
    • Grants and funding
    • Journal Meetings
    • Workshops
    • The Company of Biologists
    • Journal news
  • For authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Aims and scope
    • Presubmission enquiries
    • Article types
    • Manuscript preparation
    • Cover suggestions
    • Editorial process
    • Promoting your paper
    • Open Access
    • Outstanding paper prize
    • Biology Open transfer
  • Journal info
    • Journal policies
    • Rights and permissions
    • Media policies
    • Reviewer guide
    • Sign up for alerts
  • Contacts
    • Contact JEB
    • Subscriptions
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
    • For library administrators
  • COB
    • About The Company of Biologists
    • Development
    • Journal of Cell Science
    • Journal of Experimental Biology
    • Disease Models & Mechanisms
    • Biology Open

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Experimental Biology
  • COB
    • About The Company of Biologists
    • Development
    • Journal of Cell Science
    • Journal of Experimental Biology
    • Disease Models & Mechanisms
    • Biology Open

supporting biologistsinspiring biology

Journal of Experimental Biology

  • Log in
Advanced search

RSS  Twitter  Facebook  YouTube  

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Accepted manuscripts
    • Issue in progress
    • Latest complete issue
    • Issue archive
    • Archive by article type
    • Special issues
    • Subject collections
    • Interviews
    • Sign up for alerts
  • About us
    • About JEB
    • Editors and Board
    • Editor biographies
    • Travelling Fellowships
    • Grants and funding
    • Journal Meetings
    • Workshops
    • The Company of Biologists
    • Journal news
  • For authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Aims and scope
    • Presubmission enquiries
    • Article types
    • Manuscript preparation
    • Cover suggestions
    • Editorial process
    • Promoting your paper
    • Open Access
    • Outstanding paper prize
    • Biology Open transfer
  • Journal info
    • Journal policies
    • Rights and permissions
    • Media policies
    • Reviewer guide
    • Sign up for alerts
  • Contacts
    • Contact JEB
    • Subscriptions
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
    • For library administrators
Research Article
Dolphin echolocation behaviour during active long-range target approaches
Michael Ladegaard, Jason Mulsow, Dorian S. Houser, Frants Havmand Jensen, Mark Johnson, Peter Teglberg Madsen, James J. Finneran
Journal of Experimental Biology 2019 222: jeb189217 doi: 10.1242/jeb.189217 Published 25 January 2019
Michael Ladegaard
1Zoophysiology, Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Michael Ladegaard
  • For correspondence: michael.ladegaard@bios.au.dk
Jason Mulsow
2National Marine Mammal Foundation, 2240 Shelter Island Drive, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92106, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dorian S. Houser
2National Marine Mammal Foundation, 2240 Shelter Island Drive, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92106, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Frants Havmand Jensen
3Aarhus Institute of Advanced Studies, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Frants Havmand Jensen
Mark Johnson
1Zoophysiology, Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark
4Sea Mammal Research Unit, St Andrews KY16 8LB, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Mark Johnson
Peter Teglberg Madsen
1Zoophysiology, Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark
3Aarhus Institute of Advanced Studies, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Peter Teglberg Madsen
James J. Finneran
5United States Navy Marine Mammal Program, Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Pacific, Code 71510, 53560 Hull Street, San Diego, CA 92152, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & tables
  • Supp info
  • Info & metrics
  • PDF + SI
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Tables

Figures

  • Fig. 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 1.

    Interclick interval (ICI) against target range for two free-swimming bottlenose dolphins (SAY and TRO). ICIs produced out to target ranges of 150 m (A,D; from boxed region of B,E, respectively), or over the entire target range interval (B,E) for SAY and TRO, respectively. To improve visualisation, ICI was filtered on a per-trial basis using a moving median filter centred on each data point and including three points before and after (seven points in total) for all clicks detected on the SoundTrap at a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) >6 dB, ICI >10 ms and target range >1 m (SAY total clicks: 14,343, TRO total clicks: 7681). Data points are semi-transparent (alpha: 0.05) to improve visualisation of density. (C,F) Percentage of unfiltered ICIs exceeding the TWTT in 10 m range bins for SAY and TRO, respectively.

  • Fig. 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 2.

    ICI and click packet usage in relation to target range for presumed on-axis clicks for two trained bottlenose dolphins. (A,B) ICI of presumed on-axis clicks as a function of target range. ICIs from regular clicks (SAY: N=292; TRO: N=288) are shown as grey dots. For click packets found to contain a presumed on-axis click (SAY: N=141; TRO: N=67), the ICI for the first click in each packet (pre-interpacket interval, IPI) is shown as red upwards-pointing triangles, the interval between the last click in a packet and the next click (post-IPI) is shown as purple rightwards-pointing triangles, and within-packet ICIs are shown as blue downwards-pointing triangles. In A, five regular click ICIs, 22 pre-IPIs and nine post-IPIs exceed 800 ms, while in B, zero regular click ICIs, seven pre-IPIs and 17 post-IPIs exceed the 800 ms y-axis limit. The dashed line shows the TWTT. (C,D) Histograms showing the percentage of regular click ICIs above the TWTT in 10 m target range bins. (E,F) Histograms showing the percentage of combined pre-IPIs and post-IPIs above the TWTT. Empty bins in C–F are shaded in light grey.

  • Fig. 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 3.

    Target range estimates based on the delay between echo return time and most recent click event as a function of time. This figure is based on the same trial as Movie 1. Regular clicks are shown as black dots and packet clicks are in blue. The inset in the upper right corner shows the sound pressure (black line, upper panel) received on the Dtag in the first 2 s of the trial with packet clicks highlighted in blue. Grey vertical dotted lines illustrate echo return times calculated using the dolphin's distance from the target at the time of each click event and the speed of sound in water. The inset also shows how the echo delay measured from the most recent click directly translates into the correct target range (black dots highlighted with black circles, lower panel) for the first three click events because ICI>TWTT. Returning echoes from click packets result in a series of underestimates of target range (black dots) except for the last packet echo that has a causal relationship with the last click in each packet and because IPI>TWTT. *Based on the results from Finneran et al. (2013). The lower dashed horizontal line indicates the approximate upper limit out to which a ∼20log10(R) (where R is target range) receiving side automatic gain control (AGC) has been observed. The upper dashed horizontal line shows the upper limit where forward masking effects are known to occur following click production (depending on source level, SL).

  • Fig. 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 4.

    SL of presumed on-axis clicks in relation to target range for two bottlenose dolphins. (A) SL for 291 regular clicks (grey dots) and 141 packet clicks (blue triangles) presumed on-axis for SAY. The dependence of all SLs (both regular and packet clicks) on target range is modelled as a linear regression: SL=19log10(R)+170 dB re. 1 µPa (peak to peak, pp), r2=0.56, shown as a solid black line along with the 95% confidence interval (CI; grey shaded area). Inset: histograms showing the distributions of slopes and intercepts calculated for individual trials with five or more possible on-axis clicks (N=31) fitted to the model: SL=slope×log10(R)+intercept. (B) SL for 288 regular clicks and 67 packet clicks presumed on-axis for TRO. The dependence of all SLs on target range is modelled as a linear regression: SL=17log10(R)+171 dB re. 1 µPa (pp), r2=0.69, shown together with the 95% CI. Inset: histograms (N=21) as in A. In A and B, the SoundTrap clipping level (pp) and click detector threshold plus estimated transmission loss (TL; dotted lines) illustrate the dynamic recording range (for more information, see Fig. S1). Note that the linear regression data in this figure are included mainly for visualisation of the approximate degree of adjustment, but that LME analysis suggests significant differences between the range-dependent SL adjustment for regular clicks and packet clicks (see Table S4).

  • Fig. 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 5.

    Source level of presumed on-axis clicks in relation to ICI. (A) SLs for 291 regular clicks (grey dots) and 141 packet clicks (blue triangles) presumed on-axis for SAY. (B) SLs for 288 regular clicks and 67 packet clicks presumed on-axis for TRO.

Previous ArticleNext Article
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

This Issue

Keywords

  • Biosonar
  • Click packet
  • DTAG
  • Interclick interval
  • Source level
  • Toothed whale

 Download PDF

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Experimental Biology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Dolphin echolocation behaviour during active long-range target approaches
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Experimental Biology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Experimental Biology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Research Article
Dolphin echolocation behaviour during active long-range target approaches
Michael Ladegaard, Jason Mulsow, Dorian S. Houser, Frants Havmand Jensen, Mark Johnson, Peter Teglberg Madsen, James J. Finneran
Journal of Experimental Biology 2019 222: jeb189217 doi: 10.1242/jeb.189217 Published 25 January 2019
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Research Article
Dolphin echolocation behaviour during active long-range target approaches
Michael Ladegaard, Jason Mulsow, Dorian S. Houser, Frants Havmand Jensen, Mark Johnson, Peter Teglberg Madsen, James J. Finneran
Journal of Experimental Biology 2019 222: jeb189217 doi: 10.1242/jeb.189217 Published 25 January 2019

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Alerts

Please log in to add an alert for this article.

Sign in to email alerts with your email address

Article navigation

  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • INTRODUCTION
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgements
    • FOOTNOTES
    • References
  • Figures & tables
  • Supp info
  • Info & metrics
  • PDF + SI
  • PDF

Related articles

Cited by...

More in this TOC section

  • Nest substrate and tool shape significantly affect the mechanics and energy requirements of avian eggshell puncture
  • Jaw kinematics and tongue protraction-retraction during Chewing and drinking in the pig
  • Early developmental stages of native populations of Ciona intestinalis under increased temperature are affected by local habitat history
Show more RESEARCH ARTICLE

Similar articles

Other journals from The Company of Biologists

Development

Journal of Cell Science

Disease Models & Mechanisms

Biology Open

Advertisement

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.

Articles

  • Accepted manuscripts
  • Issue in progress
  • Latest complete issue
  • Issue archive
  • Archive by article type
  • Special issues
  • Subject collections
  • Interviews
  • Sign up for alerts

About us

  • About JEB
  • Editors and Board
  • Editor biographies
  • Travelling Fellowships
  • Grants and funding
  • Journal Meetings
  • Workshops
  • The Company of Biologists
  • Journal news

For Authors

  • Submit a manuscript
  • Aims and scope
  • Presubmission enquiries
  • Article types
  • Manuscript preparation
  • Cover suggestions
  • Editorial process
  • Promoting your paper
  • Open Access
  • Outstanding paper prize
  • Biology Open transfer

Journal Info

  • Journal policies
  • Rights and permissions
  • Media policies
  • Reviewer guide
  • Sign up for alerts

Contact

  • Contact JEB
  • Subscriptions
  • Advertising
  • Feedback

 Twitter   YouTube   LinkedIn

© 2021   The Company of Biologists Ltd   Registered Charity 277992