Ecoacoustics and Multispecies Semiosis: Naming, Semantics, Semiotic Characteristics, and Competencies

Almo Farina,Peng Li,Alice Eldridge

doi:10.1007/s12304-021-09402-6

Abstract

Biosemiotics to date has focused on the exchange of signals between organisms, in line with bioacoustics; consideration of the wider acoustic environment as a semiotic medium is under-developed. The nascent discipline of ecoacoustics, that investigates the role of environmental sound in ecological processes and dynamics, fills this gap. In this paper we introduce key ecoacoustic terminology and concepts in order to highlight the value of ecoacoustics as a discipline in which to conceptualise and study intra- and interspecies semiosis. We stress the inherently subjective nature of all sensory scapes (vivo-, land-, vibro- and soundscapes) and propose that they should always bear an organismic attribution. Key terms to describe the sources (geophony, biophony, anthropophony, technophony) and scales (sonotopes, soundtopes, sonotones) of soundscapes are described. We introduce epithets for soundscapes to point to the degree to which the global environment is implicated in semiosis (latent, sensed and interpreted soundscapes); terms for describing key ecological structures and processes (acoustic community, acoustic habitat, ecoacoustic events) and examples of ecoacoustic events (choruses and noise) are described. The acoustic eco-field is recognized as the semiotic model that enables soniferous species to intercept core resources like food, safety and roosting places. We note that whilst ecoacoustics to date has focused on the critical task of the development of metrics for application in conservation and biodiversity assessment, these can be enriched by advancing conceptual and theoretical foundations. Finally, the mutual value of integrating ecoacoustic and biosemiotics perspectives is considered.

Highlights

In recent decades sound has become recognized as a significant component of evolutionary ecospace (Hauser 1996; Kroodsma and Miller 1996) and core component of the ecosystem functioning within the ecological sciences (e.g. Qi et al 2008)
Refining the nomenclature previously outlined in Landscape Theory (Farina and Pieretti 2014) we propose a distinction of soundscapes in three categories: Latent, sensed and interpreted landscape
We have introduced and illustrated key ecoacoustic terminology and concepts in order to highlight the value of ecoacoustics as a discipline in which to conceptualise and study intra- and interspecies soundscape semiosis

Summary

Introduction

In recent decades sound has become recognized as a significant component of evolutionary ecospace (Hauser 1996; Kroodsma and Miller 1996) and core component of the ecosystem functioning within the ecological sciences (e.g. Qi et al 2008). We define soundscape as the part of the vibroscape (Šturm et al 2018) converted by specific organs and successive cognitive process into sounds and composed of a collection of ecoacoustic events (signals) that after an interpretation have the capacity to influence behavior and ecology of the listeners. We can say that at every location across a landscape a specific organism-centred soundscape arises This dynamic frame allows fast-moving species like birds or insects to rapidly infer information in a short time and to generate meaningful and accurate maps of acoustic signals that become carriers of meaning for the localisation and acquisition of resources.

Landscape structure and acoustic patterns

Conclusions