Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Spatiotemporal analysis of an acoustic environment: interactions between landscape features and sounds

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

So far landscape analysis meant analysis of the spatial pattern of land cover or land use. However, biological organisms do not perceive the landscape only as land cover or land use, but they use all their senses, in order to become familiar with and react to their surroundings. We analyzed the acoustic environment as an additional layer of spatial information in landscape analysis, shortening the monopoly of visual patterns as landscape descriptors. We recorded sounds from a rural protected area into seven categories based on their origin, and examined their spatiotemporal variability and their correlation with landscape characteristics. The sounds were distinguished as Foreground or Background sounds. Foreground sounds correspond to sharp sounds originating near the observer and usually are understood as signals of urgent information, triggering reactions; while background sounds carry information over longer distances and may be used as landmarks to help individuals find their bearing even in the absence of visual signs. We found that the acoustic environment varies both temporally and spatially reflecting anthropogenic, geophysical and biological activities. The spatial pattern of the background sounds correlates, to an extent, with the visually perceived landscape features, but it does not correlate with the spatial pattern of the foreground sounds, which do not correlate strongly with the landscape pattern. This spatial pattern mismatch between acoustic environment and landscape, along with the highly dynamic nature of the acoustic environment compared to the relatively static nature of the land cover and land use spatial pattern highlight a limitation of the classical landscape analysis, and expands our understanding of the cognitive landscape.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bonaiuto M, Fornara F, Bonnes M (2003) Indexes of perceived residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachment in urban environments: a confirmation study on the city of Rome. Landsc Urban Plan 65:43–54. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00236-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botteldooren D, De Coensel B, De Muer T (2006) The temporal structure of urban sounds capes. J Sound Vib 292:105–123. doi:10.1016/j.jsv.2005.07.026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bray JR, Curtis JT (1957) An ordination of the upland forest communities of southern Wisconsin. Ecol Monogr 27:325–349. doi:10.2307/1942268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown AL, Muhar A (2004) An approach to the acoustic design of outdoor space. J Environ Plann Manage 47:827–842. doi:10.1080/0964056042000284857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brumm H, Todt D (2002) Noise-dependent song amplitude regulation in a territorial songbird. Anim Behav 63:891–897. doi:10.1006/anbe.2001.1968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carles JL, Barrio IL, de Lucio JV (1999) Sound influence on landscape values. Landsc Urban Plan 43:191–200. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(98)00112-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke DS (1987) Principles of semiotic. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke KR, Warwick RM (1994) Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Natural Environment Council, UK

  • Collins AM, Quillian MR (1969) Retrieval time from semantic memory. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav 8:240–248. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(69)80069-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin A (1998) Village bells. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Deely J (2005) Basics of semiotics, 4th edn. Tartu University Press, Tartu

    Google Scholar 

  • Fang C, Ling D (2005) Guidence for noise reduction provided by tree belts. Landsc Urban Plan 71:29–34. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.01.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farina A, Belgrano A (2004) The eco-field: a new paradigm for landscape ecology. Ecol Res 19:107–110. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1703.2003.00613.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farina A, Belgrano A (2006) The eco-field hypothesis: toward a cognitive landscape. Landscape Ecol 21:5–17. doi:10.1007/s10980-005-7755-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farina A, Bogaert J, Schipania I (2005) Cognitive landscape and information: new perspectives to investigate the ecological complexity. Biosystems 79:235–240. doi:10.1016/j.biosystems.2004.09.018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gaver WW (1993a) How do we hear in the world? Explorations in ecological acoustics. Ecol Psychol 5:285–313. doi:10.1207/s15326969eco0504_2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaver WW (1993b) What in the world do we hear? An ecological approach to auditory event perception. Ecol Psychol 5:1–29. doi:10.1207/s15326969eco0501_1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedfors P, Grahn P (1998) Soundscapes in urban and rural planning and design. Yearb Soundscape Stud 1:67–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallimanis SA, Mazaris DA, Tzanopoulos J, Halley MJ, Pantis DJ, Sgardelis PS (2008) How does habitat diversity and area affect species diversity? Glob Ecol Biogeogr 17:532–538. doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2008.00393.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klæboe R, Engelien E, Steinnes M (2006) Context sensitive noise impact mapping. Appl Acoust 67:620–642. doi:10.1016/j.apacoust.2005.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal K, Marks BJ (1995) FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. USDA For Serv Gen Tech Rep PNW-351

  • Miller PN (2008) US National Parks and management of park soundscapes: a review. Appl Acoust 69:77–92. doi:10.1016/j.apacoust.2007.04.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielson HR, Nielson F (1995) Semantics with applications, a formal introduction, 1st edn. Wiley, Chicester

    Google Scholar 

  • Öhrström E, Skånberg A, Svensson H et al (2006) Effects of road traffic noise and the benefit of access to quietness. J Sound Vibrat 295:40–59. doi:10.1016/j.jsv.2005.11.034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papadimitriou K, Mazaris AD, Kallimanis AS, Pantis JD (2009) Cartographic representation of the sonic environment. Cartographic J (in press)

  • Pheasant R, Horoshenkov K, Watts G (2008) The acoustic and visual factors influencing the construction of tranquil space in urban and rural environments tranquil spaces-quiet places? J Acoust Soc Am 123:1446–1457. doi:10.1121/1.2831735

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn PG, Keough JM (2002) Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge University Press, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosch E (1978) Principles of categorization. In: Rosch E, Lloyd BB (eds) Cognition and categorization. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Schafer RM (1969) The new soundscape: a handbook for the modern music. Teacher, BMI, Don Mills, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  • Schafer RM (1977) The tuning of the world. Knopf, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson SD, Jeffs A, Montgomery JC et al (2008) Nocturnal relocation of adult and juvenile coral reef fishes in response to reef noise. Coral Reefs 27:97–104. doi:10.1007/s00338-007-0294-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taft OW, Haig SM (2006) Importance of wetland landscape structure to shorebirds wintering in an agricultural valley. Landscape Ecol 21:169–184. doi:10.1007/s10980-005-0146-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tardieu J, Susini P, Poisson F et al (2008) Perceptual study of soundscapes in train stations. Appl Acoust 69:1224–1239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tischendorf L, Fahrig L (2000) On the usage and measurement of landscape connectivity. Oikos 90:7–19. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.900102.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Truax B (1984) Acoustic communication. Ablex, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Truax B (1999) Handbook of acoustic ecology, 2nd edn. Street Publishing, (CD-ROM version). Burnaby, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • van Poll R (1997) The perceived quality of the urban residential environment–a multi-attribute evaluation. Roermund, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. The Netherlands

  • Viollon S, Lavandier C, Drake C (2002) Influence of visual settings on sound ratings in an urban environment. Appl Acoust 63:493–511. doi:10.1016/S0003-682X(01)00053-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vuilleumier S, Metzger R (2005) Animal dispersal modelling: Handling landscape features and related animal choices. Ecol Modell 190:159–170. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.04.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watts G, Chinn L, Godfrey N (1999) The effects of vegetation on the perception of traffic noise. Appl Acoust 56:39–56. doi:10.1016/S0003-682X(98)00019-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watts G, Morgan P, Abbott A (2006) A proposal for identifying quiet areas in accordance with the Environmental Noise Directive (END) In: Proceedings of IOA autumn conference 8, pp 7

  • Wg A EN–European Commission Working Group Assessment of Exposure to Noise (2003) Good practice guide for strategic noise mapping and the production of associated data on noise exposure. Assessment of Exposure to Noise Brussel: European Commission’s Working Group. pp 63

  • Wiens JA (1999) Toward a unified landscape ecology. In: Wiens JA, Moss MR (eds) Issues in landscape ecology. International Association for Landscape Ecology, Snowmass Village, Colorado, USA, pp 148–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JA, Stenseth NC, Van Horne B et al (1993) Ecological mechanisms and landscape ecology. Oikos 66:369–380. doi:10.2307/3544931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J (2006) Landscape ecology, cross-disciplinarity, and sustainability science. Landscape Ecol 21:1–4. doi:10.1007/s10980-006-7195-2

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Hobbs R (2002) Key issues and research priorities in landscape ecology: An idiosyncratic synthesis. Landscape Ecol 17:355–365. doi:10.1023/A:1020561630963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Hobbs R (eds) (2006) Key topics in landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Hobbs R (2007) Landscape ecology: the state-of-the-science. In: Wu J, Hobbs R (eds) Key topics in landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 271–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang M, Kan J (2007) Towards the evaluation, description, and creation of soundscapes in urban open spaces. Environ Plann B Plann Des 34:68–86. doi:10.1068/b31162

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the researchers who have participated to the field work: (in alphabetical order) Dionysis Batzakis, Ioanna Etmektsogolou, Giorgos Frangiskos, Iordanis Houvardas, Nikos Kefalogiannis, Evagelia Drakou, Eleni Kotali, Hristos Koutsodimakis, Theodoros Lotis, Apostolos Loufopoulos, Filippos Theoharidis, Andreas Mniestis, Katerina Tzedaki and Nikos Valsamakis. This research is supported by the PYTHAGORAS project of the Operational Program for Education and Initial Vocational Training (EPEAEK) of the Hellenic Ministry of Education under the 3rd European Community Support Framework for Greece.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antonios D. Mazaris.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mazaris, A.D., Kallimanis, A.S., Chatzigianidis, G. et al. Spatiotemporal analysis of an acoustic environment: interactions between landscape features and sounds. Landscape Ecol 24, 817–831 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-009-9360-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-009-9360-x

Keywords

Navigation