Search

The sounds present inside a beehive originate from the overlap of honeybee buzzes with external sounds. They reveal patterns that support the hypothesis that the sonic context of the beehive may be utilized by honeybees as a source of ecoacoustic codes for communication and the coordination of social activity. Patterns were observed in a data series of acoustic files sampled at a frequency of 48 kHz during the period May-July 2023 in a beehive of Apis mellifera ligustica (Spinola, 1806). The acoustic information was extracted using the acoustic complexity index (ACIt f ) algorithm applied to a fast Fourier transform matrix. Data series, aggregated in 1368 min × 512 frequency bins × 61 days, were tentatively classified according to three temporal classes of aggregation (eight, six, and four clusters, respectively) using the hierarchical K-means clustering algorithm. The clusters obtained at these three resolutions were considered potential ecoacoustic codes (PECs) belonging to each minute of the data series. The number of discontinuities along the 24-h PEC sequence, the coefficient of variation of the number of PECs at daily and seasonal scales, and the PEC sample entropy confirmed a patterned distribution of PECs across the 24 h, modulated at a monthly scale. A significant correlation was found between these indices and the daily average wind speed, and temperature. Honeybee buzz is an informative medium used by honeybees to develop survival strategies., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest We declare that we have not interest and that we have not received funds for this paper. Sincerely., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Ecological codes have been defined as every biological code integrated by factors originated by the environmental context that participates in the codepoiesis process. Ecological codes create a strict relationship between the inner world of organsims and the external relational world, and represent the mechanism with which the vivo-scape is realized. Acoustic codes are used in nature to decode acoustic signals between individuals of the same or different species and belong to the category of biological codes. Ecoacoustic codes are the outcome of the evolution of acoustic codes, and results as the interplay between acoustic codes and environmental factors. Soundtope codes represent the results of emerging properties of the acoustic communities., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest We declare that we have not interest, and that we have not received funds for this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Sonotopes are the acoustic patches of a soundscape, composed by different occurrences of geophonies, biophonies, and technophonies. According an ecosemiotic perspective, ecoacoustic events (EEs) are the vehicles from the attribution of meaning to the emergent sonotopes and work as neural codes. The process of encoding is suggested to be active between the perception of sonotopes and EE detection. In Ortolano Rural Sanctuary, from a grid of 12 acoustic digital recorders (ADRs) at an average distance of 30 m each with a microphone set to receive sounds from a near acoustic field, 824,160 one-minute acoustic files were obtained from October 2017 to September 2018. From these files, using the combination of three acoustic complexity indices (ACI ft , ACI ft evenness, and ACI tf evenness), through the ecoacoustic event detection and identification (EEDI) procedure, more than 200 EEs on average per ADR were extracted during this period. The EEs were seasonally aggregated with a significant separation between fall-winter and spring-summer periods. Rain and wind were important in EE composition according to location and seasonality. The number of EEs detected from just one month to three months was 57% of the total, and the first of the nine classes of ACI ft belonged to 78% of all classes of abundance. The EEs and ACI tf similarity were not correlated with the distance between ADRs, confirming the correctness of the near-field approach to detect sounds from landscapes and EE spatial independence. The ranging capacities to distinguish distance from sound sources and to discriminate the temporal and frequential patterns of acoustic signals are some of the mechanisms that species use to detect and encode environmental acoustic complexity. Species are supposed to use EE to explore and assess the acoustic habitat and probably to obtain mental maps of the surroundings they must move around using an acoustic exploration., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Multi-layer communication and sensing network assures the exchange of relevant information between animals and their umwelten, imparting complexity to the ecological systems. Individual soniferous species, the acoustic community, and soundscape are the three main operational levels that comprise this multi-layer network. Acoustic adaptation and acoustic niche are two more important mechanisms that regulate the acoustic performances at the first level while the acoustic community model explains the complexity of the interspecific acoustic network at the second level. Acoustic habitat and ecoacoustic events are two of the most relevant mechanisms that operate at the third level. The exchange of ecoacoustic information on each of these levels is assured by ecoacoustic codes. At the level of individual sonifeorus species, a dyadic intraspecific exchange of information is established between an emitter and a receiver. Ecoacoustic codes discriminate, identify, and label specific signals that pertain to the theme, variation, motif repetition, and intensity of signals. At the acoustic community level, a voluntarily or involuntarily communication is established between networks of interspecific emitters and receivers. Ecoacoustic codes at this level transmit information (e.g., recognition of predators, location of food sources, availability and location of refuges) between one species and the acoustically interacting community and impart cohesion to interspecific assemblages. At the soundscape level, acoustic information is transferred from a mosaic of geophonies, biophonies, and technophonies to different species that discriminate meaningful ecoacoustic events and their temporal dynamics during habitat selection processes. Ecoacoustic codes at this level operate on a limited set of signals from the environmental acoustic dynamic that are heterogeneous in time and space, and these codes are interpreted differently according to the species during habitat selection and the completion of phenological cycles. The process of ecoacoustic coding can be interpreted according to the eco-field theory, which describes the procedures utilized by a receiver to intercept and optimize acoustic information. The acoustic codes may be detected and identified using mathematical models that simulate their performances. The Acoustic Complexity Indices are an appropriate tool to investigate the acoustic codes in action on all three levels. Ecoacoustic codes are powerful agencies used by sound-adapted species to cope with environmental novelties, and their efficiency may represent an important divide between whether a species perpetuates or becomes extinct., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

An acoustic community is defined as an aggregation of species that produces sound by using internal or extra-body sound-producing tools. Such communities occur in aquatic (freshwater and marine) and terrestrial environments. An acoustic community is the biophonic component of a soundtope and is characterized by its acoustic signature, which results from the distribution of sonic information associated with signal amplitude and frequency. Distinct acoustic communities can be described according to habitat, the frequency range of the acoustic signals, and the time of day or the season. Near and far fields can be identified empirically, thus the acoustic community can be used as a proxy for biodiversity richness. The importance of ecoacoustic research is rapidly growing due to the increasing awareness of the intrusion of anthropogenic sounds (technophonies) into natural and human-modified ecosystems and the urgent need to adopt more efficient predictive tools to compensate for the effects of climate change. The concept of an acoustic community provides an operational scale for a non-intrusive biodiversity survey and analysis that can be carried out using new passive audio recording technology, coupled with methods of vast data processing and storage., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Landscape ecology deals with ecological processes in their spatial context. It shares with ecosystem ecology the primate of emergent ecological disciplines. The aim of this contribution is to approach the definition of landscapes using cognitive paradigms. Neutral-based landscape (NbL), individual-based landscape (IbL) and observed-based landscape (ObL) are defined to explore the cognitive mechanisms. NbL represents the undecoded component of the cognitive matrix. The IbL is the portion of landscape perceived by the biological sensors. ObL is the part of the cognitive matrix perceived using the cultural background of the observer. The perceived landscape (PL) is composed by the sum of these three approaches of landscape perception. Two further types of information (sensu Stonier) are recognized in this process of perception: the compressed information, as it is present inside the cognitive matrix, and the decompressed information that will structure the PL when a semiotic relationship operates between the organisms and the cognitive matrix. Scaling properties of these three PL components are recognized in space and time. In NbL scale seems irrelevant, in IbL the perception is filtered by organismic scaling and in ObL the spatio-temporal scale seems of major importance. Definitively, perception is scale-dependent. A combination of the cognitive approach with information paradigms to study landscapes opens new perspectives in the interpretation of ecological complexity.