Paul Wensveen

Dr. Paul Wensveen

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

19Years (2008-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 November 2010 in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RKRonald A. Kastelein
Ronald A. Kastelein
LHLean Hoek
Lean Hoek
CJChrist A. F. de Jong
Christ A. F. de Jong
PWPaul Wensveen
Paul Wensveen
The underwater hearing sensitivity of a young male harbor porpoise for tonal signals of various signal durations was quantified by using a behavioral psychophysical technique. The animal was trained to respond only when it detected an acoustic signal. Fifty percent detection thresholds were obtained for tonal signals (15 frequencies between 0.25–160 kHz, durations 0.5–5000 ms depending on the frequency; 134 frequency-duration combinations in total). Detection thresholds were quantified by varying signal amplitude by the 1-up 1-down staircase method. The hearing thresholds increased when the signal duration fell below the time constant of integration. The time constants, derived from an exponential model of integration [Plomp and Bouman, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 31, 749–758 (1959)], varied from 629 ms at 2 kHz to 39 ms at 64 kHz. The integration times of the porpoises were similar to those of other mammals including humans, even though the porpoise is a marine mammal and a hearing specialist. The results enable more accurate estimations of the distances at which porpoises can detect short-duration environmental tonal signals. The audiogram thresholds presented by Kastelein et al. [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 112, 334–344 (2002)], after correction for the frequency bandwidth of the FM signals, are similar to the results of the present study for signals of 1500 ms duration. Harbor porpoise hearing is more sensitive between 2 and 10 kHz, and less sensitive above 10 kHz, than formerly believed.

1 December 2012 in Aquatic Mammals
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PMPatrick J. O. Miller
Patrick J. O. Miller
PKPetter H. Kvadsheim
Petter H. Kvadsheim
FLFrans-Peter A. Lam
Frans-Peter A. Lam
PWPaul Wensveen
Paul Wensveen
RARicardo Antunes
Ricardo Antunes
LSLise Doksaeter Sivle
Lise Doksaeter Sivle

6 May 2025 in Global Ecology and Biogeography
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
KDKevin F. A. Darras
Kevin F. A. Darras
RRRodney A. Rountree
Rodney A. Rountree
SWSteven L. Van Wilgenburg
Steven L. Van Wilgenburg
ACAnna Cord
Anna Cord
FPFrederik Pitz
Frederik Pitz
TWThomas Cherico Wanger
Thomas Cherico Wanger
Aim: The urgency for remote, reliable and scalable biodiversity monitoring amidst mounting human pressures on ecosystems has sparked worldwide interest in Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM), which can track life underwater and on land. However, we lack a unified methodology to report this sampling effort and a comprehensive overview of PAM coverage to gauge its potential as a global research and monitoring tool. To address this gap, we created the Worldwide Soundscapes project, a collaborative network and growing database comprising metadata from 416 datasets across all realms (terrestrial, marine, freshwater and subterranean).Location: Worldwide, 12,343 sites, all ecosystem types.Time Period: 1991 to present.Major Taxa Studied: All soniferous taxa.Methods: We synthesise sampling coverage across spatial, temporal and ecological scales using metadata describing sampling locations, deployment schedules, focal taxa and audio recording parameters. We explore global trends in biological, anthropogenic and geophysical sounds based on 168 selected recordings from 12 ecosystems across all realms.Results: Terrestrial sampling is spatially denser (46 sites per million square kilometre—Mkm2) than aquatic sampling (0.3 and 1.8 sites/Mkm2 in oceans and fresh water) with only two subterranean datasets. Although diel and lunar cycles are well sampled across realms, only marine datasets (55%) comprehensively sample all seasons. Across the 12 ecosystems selected for exploring global acoustic trends, biological sounds showed contrasting diel patterns across ecosystems, declined with distance from the Equator, and were negatively correlated with anthropogenic sounds.Main Conclusions: PAM can inform macroecological studies as well as global conservation and phenology syntheses, but representation can be improved by expanding terrestrial taxonomic scope, sampling coverage in the high seas and subterranean ecosystems, and spatio‐temporal replication in freshwater habitats. Overall, this worldwide PAM network holds promise to support cross‐realm biodiversity research and monitoring efforts.

1 June 2015 in Royal Society Open Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PMPatrick Miller
Patrick Miller
PKP. H. Kvadsheim
P. H. Kvadsheim
FLF. P. A. Lam
F. P. A. Lam
PTP. L. Tyack
P. L. Tyack
CCC. Curé
C. Curé
SHS. K. Hooker
S. K. Hooker
Although northern bottlenose whales were the most heavily hunted beaked whale, we have little information about this species in its remote habitat of the North Atlantic Ocean. Underwater anthropogenic noise and disruption of their natural habitat may be major threats, given the sensitivity of other beaked whales to such noise disturbance. We attached dataloggers to 13 northern bottlenose whales and compared their natural sounds and movements to those of one individual exposed to escalating levels of 1–2 kHz upsweep naval sonar signals. At a received sound pressure level (SPL) of 98 dB re 1 μPa, the whale turned to approach the sound source, but at a received SPL of 107 dB re 1 μPa, the whale began moving in an unusually straight course and then made a near 180° turn away from the source, and performed the longest and deepest dive (94 min, 2339 m) recorded for this species. Animal movement parameters differed significantly from baseline for more than 7 h until the tag fell off 33–36 km away. No clicks were emitted during the response period, indicating cessation of normal echolocation-based foraging. A sharp decline in both acoustic and visual detections of conspecifics after exposure suggests other whales in the area responded similarly. Though more data are needed, our results indicate high sensitivity of this species to acoustic disturbance, with consequent risk from marine industrialization and naval activity.

1 February 2014 in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
PMPatrick Miller
Patrick Miller
RARicardo N. Antunes
Ricardo N. Antunes
PWPaul Wensveen
Paul Wensveen
FSFilipa I. P. Samarra
Filipa I. P. Samarra
AAAna Catarina Alves
Ana Catarina Alves
LTLen Thomas
Len Thomas
Eight experimentally controlled exposures to 1−2 kHz or 6−7 kHz sonar signals were conducted with four killer whale groups. The source level and proximity of the source were increased during each exposure in order to reveal response thresholds. Detailed inspection of movements during each exposure session revealed sustained changes in speed and travel direction judged to be avoidance responses during six of eight sessions. Following methods developed for Phase-I clinical trials in human medicine, response thresholds ranging from 94 to 164 dB re 1 μPa received sound pressure level (SPL) were fitted to Bayesian dose-response functions. Thresholds did not consistently differ by sonar frequency or whether a group had previously been exposed, with a mean SPL response threshold of 142 ± 15 dB (mean ± s.d.). High levels of between- and within-individual variability were identified, indicating that thresholds depended upon other undefined contextual variables. The dose-response functions indicate that some killer whales started to avoid sonar at received SPL below thresholds assumed by the U.S. Navy. The predicted extent of habitat over which avoidance reactions occur depends upon whether whales responded to proximity or received SPL of the sonar or both, but was large enough to raise concerns about biological consequences to the whales.

1 February 2009 in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RKRonald A. Kastelein
Ronald A. Kastelein
PWPaul Wensveen
Paul Wensveen
LHLean Hoek
Lean Hoek
WVWillem C. Verboom
Willem C. Verboom
JTJohn M. Terhune
John M. Terhune
The underwater hearing sensitivities of two 1-year-old female harbor seals were quantified in a pool built for acoustic research, using a behavioral psychoacoustic technique. The animals were trained to respond when they detected an acoustic signal and not to respond when they did not (go/no-go response). Pure tones (0.125–0.25kHz) and narrowband frequency modulated (tonal) signals (center frequencies 0.5–100kHz) of 900ms duration were tested. Thresholds at each frequency were measured using the up-down staircase method and defined as the stimulus level resulting in a 50% detection rate. The audiograms of the two seals did not differ statistically: both plots showed the typical mammalian U-shape, but with a wide and flat bottom. Maximum sensitivity (54dB re 1μPa, rms) occurred at 1kHz. The frequency range of best hearing (within 10dB of maximum sensitivity) was from 0.5to40kHz (613 octaves). Higher hearing thresholds (indicating poorer sensitivity) were observed below 1 and above 40kHz. Thresholds below 4kHz were lower than those previously described for harbor seals, which demonstrates the importance of using quiet facilities, built specifically for acoustic research, for hearing studies in marine mammals. The results suggest that under unmasked conditions many anthropogenic noise sources and sounds from conspecifics are audible to harbor seals at greater ranges than formerly believed.