Skip to main content

News about Scitation

In December 2016 Scitation will launch with a new design, enhanced navigation and a much improved user experience.

To ensure a smooth transition, from today, we are temporarily stopping new account registration and single article purchases. If you already have an account you can continue to use the site as normal.

For help or more information please visit our FAQs.

banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
1. R. A. Kastelein, R. Gransier, L. Hoek, and C. A. F. d. Jong, “ The hearing threshold of a harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) for impulsive sounds (L),” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 132(2), 607610 (2012).
2. A. E. Bowles, S. L. Denes, and M. A. Shane, “ Acoustic characteristics of ultrasonic coded transmitters for fishery applications: Could marine mammals hear them?,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128(5), 32233231 (2010).
3. X. Lurton, An Introduction to Underwater Acoustics: Principles and Applications, 2nd ed. (Springer, New York, 2009).
4. A. O. MacGillivray, “ An acoustic modelling study of seismic airgun noise in Queen Charlotte Basin,” M.Sc. thesis, University of Victoria, B.C. (2006).
5. M. J. Buckingham, “ Compressional and shear wave properties of marine sediments: Comparisons between theory and data,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117(1), 137152 (2005).
6. M. D. Collins, “ A split-step Padé solution for the parabolic equation method,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 93(4), 17361742 (1993).
7. Z. Y. Zhang and C. T. Tindle, “ Improved equivalent fluid approximations for a low shear speed ocean bottom,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 98(6), 33913396 (1995).
8. M. B. Porter and H. P. Bucker, “ Gaussian beam tracing for computing ocean acoustic fields,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 82(4), 13491359 (1987).
9. R. E. Francois and G. R. Garrison, “ Sound absorption based on ocean measurements. Part II: Boric acid contribution and equation for total absorption,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 72(6), 18791890 (1982).
10. R. Plomp and M. A. Bouman, “ Relation between hearing threshold and duration for tone pulses,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 31(6), 749758 (1959).
11. R. A. Kastelein, L. Hoek, C. A. F. d. Jong, and P. J. Wensveen, “ The effect of signal duration on the underwater detection thresholds of a harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) for single frequency-modulated tonal signals between 0.25 and 160 kHz,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128(5), 32113222 (2010).
12. P. T. Madsen, M. Johnson, P. J. O. Miller, N. A. Soto, J. Lynch, and P. Tyack, “ Quantitative measures of air-gun pulses recorded on sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus) using acoustic tags during controlled exposure experiments,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 120(4), 23662379 (2006).
13. R. Plomp, “ Hearing threshold for periodic tone pulses,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 33(11), 15611569 (1961).
14. J. R. Nedwell, B. Edwards, A. W. H. Turnpenny, and J. Gordon, “ Fish and marine mammal audiograms: A summary of available information,” Subacoustech (2004), 278 p.
15. D. S. Houser, D. A. Helweg, and P. W. B. Moore, “ A bandpass filter-bank model of auditory sensitivity in the humpback whale,” Aquat. Mamm. 27, 8291 (2001). Available at
16. C. W. Clark and W. T. Ellison, “ Potential use of low-frequency sounds by baleen whales for probing the environment: Evidence from models and empirical measurements,” in Echolocation in Bats and Dolphins, edited by J. A. Thomas, C. Moss, and M. Vater (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2004), pp. 564582.
17. T. Marquardt, J. Hensel, D. Mrowinski, and G. Scholz, “ Low-frequency characteristics of human and guinea pig cochleae,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121(6), 36283638 (2007).
18. J. J. Finneran and C. E. Schlundt, “ Subjective loudness level measurements and equal loudness contours in a bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus),” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 130(5), 31243136 (2011).
19. W. T. Ellison, B. L. Southall, C. W. Clark, and A. S. Frankel, “ A new context-based approach to assess marine mammal behavioral responses to anthropogenic sounds,” Conserv. Biol. 26(1), 2128 (2012).

Data & Media loading...


Article metrics loading...



Most attention about the acoustic effects of marine survey sound sources on marine mammals has focused on airgun arrays, with other common sources receiving less scrutiny. Sound levels above hearing threshold (sensation levels) were modeled for six marine mammal species and seven different survey sources in shallow water. The model indicated that odontocetes were most likely to hear sounds from mid-frequency sources (fishery, communication, and hydrographic systems), mysticetes from low-frequency sources (sub-bottom profiler and airguns), and pinnipeds from both mid- and low-frequency sources. High-frequency sources (side-scan and multibeam) generated the lowest estimated sensation levels for all marine mammal species groups.


Full text loading...


Access Key

  • FFree Content
  • OAOpen Access Content
  • SSubscribed Content
  • TFree Trial Content
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd