• Aucun résultat trouvé

Appendix 5.

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Partager "Appendix 5."

Copied!
6
0
0

Texte intégral

(1)

Appendix 5. Summary of the effects of microphone sensitivity loss on the effective detection area (ha) of each call type for different noise treatments.

Table A5.1. Effective detection area (ha) of the four call types that did not exceed our experimental range for varying degrees of microphone sensitivity loss and under ambient noise conditions (32 dBA).

dBV Loss LCSP BAWW SEWR YERA NESP TICKIT GRUNT PERWEEP WHINNY OVEN AMBI PBGR

0 4.8 5.7 8.6 13.0 - - - -

1 4.7 5.5 8.0 11.4 - - - -

2 4.6 5.3 7.4 10.2 - - - -

3 4.4 5.2 6.9 9.3 - - - -

4 4.3 5.0 6.4 8.5 - - - -

5 4.2 4.8 5.9 7.8 - - - -

6 4.0 4.6 5.4 7.2 - - - -

7 3.9 4.4 5.0 6.7 - - - -

8 3.8 4.3 4.6 6.3 - - - -

9 3.6 4.1 4.3 5.9 - - - -

10 3.5 3.9 3.9 5.5 - - - -

11 3.4 3.8 3.6 5.2 - - - -

12 3.3 3.6 3.3 4.9 - - - -

13 3.1 3.4 3.0 4.6 - - - -

14 3.0 3.3 2.7 4.3 - - - -

15 2.9 3.2 2.5 4.1 - - - -

16 2.8 3.0 2.2 3.9 - - - -

17 2.7 2.9 2.0 3.7 - - - -

18 2.6 2.7 1.8 3.5 - - - -

19 2.5 2.6 1.6 3.3 - - - -

20 2.3 2.5 1.4 3.1 - - - -

(2)

Table A5.2. Effective detection area (ha) of 12 call types for varying degrees of microphone sensitivity loss under 42 dBA noise conditions.

dBV Loss LCSP BAWW SEWR YERA NESP TICKIT GRUNT PERWEEP WHINNY OVEN AMBI PBGR

0 1.4 1.5 1.9 2.5 3.4 5.8 6.4 7.3 7.5 7.6 11.0 12.3

1 1.4 1.4 1.8 2.3 3.2 5.7 6.1 7.0 7.1 7.4 9.1 11.1

2 1.3 1.3 1.6 2.2 3.1 5.7 5.9 6.7 6.7 7.2 7.7 10.0

3 1.3 1.3 1.5 2.1 2.9 5.6 5.6 6.4 6.3 6.9 6.6 9.1

4 1.2 1.2 1.4 2.0 2.8 5.5 5.4 6.1 6.0 6.7 5.6 8.3

5 1.2 1.1 1.3 1.9 2.7 5.5 5.1 5.9 5.7 6.5 4.8 7.5

6 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.8 2.6 5.4 4.9 5.6 5.4 6.3 4.2 6.9

7 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.7 2.5 5.4 4.7 5.4 5.1 6.1 3.6 6.3

8 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.6 2.4 5.3 4.5 5.1 4.8 5.9 3.2 5.7

9 1.0 0.8 0.8 1.5 2.3 5.2 4.3 4.9 4.6 5.7 2.8 5.2

10 0.9 0.8 0.7 1.4 2.2 5.2 4.1 4.6 4.3 5.5 2.4 4.7

11 0.9 0.7 0.6 1.3 2.1 5.1 3.9 4.4 4.1 5.4 2.1 4.3

12 0.8 0.6 0.6 1.2 2.0 5.1 3.7 4.2 3.9 5.2 1.8 3.9

13 0.8 0.6 0.5 1.2 2.0 5.1 3.5 4.0 3.7 5.0 1.6 3.5

14 0.7 0.5 0.4 1.1 1.9 5.0 3.3 3.8 3.5 4.9 1.4 3.2

15 0.7 0.5 0.3 1.0 1.8 5.0 3.2 3.6 3.3 4.7 1.2 2.8

16 0.7 0.4 0.3 1.0 1.8 4.9 3.0 3.4 3.1 4.5 1.0 2.6

17 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.9 1.7 4.9 2.9 3.2 2.9 4.4 0.9 2.3

18 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.8 1.7 4.8 2.7 3.0 2.7 4.2 0.8 2.0

19 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.8 1.6 4.8 2.6 2.9 2.6 4.1 0.6 1.8

20 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.7 1.6 4.8 2.4 2.7 2.4 4.0 0.5 1.6

(3)

Table A5.3. Effective detection area (ha) of 12 call types for varying degrees of microphone sensitivity loss under 50 dBA noise conditions.

dBV Loss LCSP BAWW SEWR YERA NESP TICKIT GRUNT PERWEEP WHINNY OVEN AMBI PBGR

0 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.1 3.5 3.7 3.5 4.5 3.5 8.9 5.1

1 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.1 3.5 3.5 3.3 4.3 3.4 7.4 4.7

2 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.8 1.1 3.5 3.4 3.1 4.1 3.3 6.2 4.2

3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.8 1.1 3.4 3.2 2.9 3.9 3.2 5.3 3.8

4 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.7 1.0 3.4 3.0 2.8 3.7 3.0 4.5 3.5

5 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.7 1.0 3.4 2.9 2.6 3.5 2.9 3.9 3.1

6 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.7 1.0 3.4 2.7 2.5 3.3 2.8 3.3 2.8

7 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.6 1.0 3.3 2.6 2.3 3.2 2.7 2.9 2.5

8 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.6 1.0 3.3 2.4 2.2 3.0 2.6 2.5 2.3

9 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.9 3.3 2.3 2.0 2.8 2.5 2.2 2.0

10 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.9 3.3 2.1 1.9 2.7 2.4 1.9 1.8

11 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.9 3.2 2.0 1.8 2.5 2.3 1.6 1.6

12 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.9 3.2 1.8 1.7 2.4 2.2 1.4 1.4

13 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.9 3.2 1.7 1.6 2.2 2.2 1.2 1.2

14 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.8 3.2 1.6 1.4 2.1 2.1 1.0 1.0

15 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.8 3.1 1.4 1.3 1.9 2.0 0.9 0.9

16 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.8 3.1 1.3 1.2 1.8 1.9 0.7 0.8

17 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.8 3.1 1.2 1.1 1.7 1.8 0.6 0.6

18 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.8 3.1 1.1 1.1 1.5 1.8 0.5 0.5

19 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.8 3.0 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.7 0.4 0.4

20 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.8 3.0 0.9 0.9 1.3 1.6 0.4 0.3

(4)

Table A5.4. Percent effective detection area loss of the four call types that did not exceed our experimental range and for varying degrees of microphone sensitivity loss under ambient noise conditions (32 dBA).

dBV Loss LCSP BAWW SEWR YERA NESP TICKIT GRUNT PERWEEP WHINNY OVEN AMBI PBGR

1 3 4 7 12 - - - -

2 6 7 14 21 - - - -

3 9 10 20 29 - - - -

4 11 14 26 35 - - - -

5 14 17 32 40 - - - -

6 17 20 37 44 - - - -

7 20 23 42 48 - - - -

8 22 26 46 52 - - - -

9 25 29 51 55 - - - -

10 28 32 55 58 - - - -

11 30 35 58 60 - - - -

12 33 37 62 62 - - - -

13 35 40 65 65 - - - -

14 38 43 68 67 - - - -

15 40 45 71 68 - - - -

16 42 48 74 70 - - - -

17 45 50 77 72 - - - -

18 47 52 79 73 - - - -

19 49 55 81 75 - - - -

20 51 57 83 76 - - - -

(5)

Table A5.5. Percent effective detection area loss of 12 call types for varying degrees of microphone sensitivity loss under 42 dBA noise conditions.

dBV Loss LCSP BAWW SEWR YERA NESP TICKIT GRUNT PERWEEP WHINNY OVEN AMBI PBGR

1 4 6 7 6 5 1 4 4 5 3 17 10

2 8 11 14 11 9 3 8 8 10 6 30 18

3 11 16 21 16 14 4 12 12 15 9 40 26

4 15 22 27 20 17 5 16 16 19 12 49 32

5 19 27 33 25 21 6 20 20 24 15 56 39

6 22 32 40 29 24 7 23 24 28 17 62 44

7 26 37 45 33 28 8 27 27 32 20 67 49

8 29 41 51 37 31 9 30 31 35 23 71 54

9 33 46 56 40 33 10 33 34 39 25 75 58

10 36 50 61 44 36 11 36 37 42 27 78 62

11 39 55 66 47 38 12 39 40 45 30 81 65

12 42 59 71 50 40 13 42 43 48 32 84 68

13 46 63 75 53 43 13 45 46 51 34 86 71

14 49 67 79 56 45 14 48 49 54 36 88 74

15 52 70 82 59 46 15 50 51 56 38 89 77

16 55 74 86 61 48 16 53 54 59 40 91 79

17 57 77 89 64 50 16 55 56 61 42 92 81

18 60 80 91 66 51 17 58 59 63 44 93 83

19 63 83 94 69 53 18 60 61 66 46 94 85

20 66 86 96 71 54 18 62 63 68 48 95 87

(6)

Table A5.6. Percent effective detection area loss of 12 call types for varying degrees of microphone sensitivity loss under 50 dBA noise conditions.

dBV Loss LCSP BAWW SEWR YERA NESP TICKIT GRUNT PERWEEP WHINNY OVEN AMBI PBGR

1 3 4 7 4 2 1 5 5 4 3 17 9

2 7 8 13 8 5 2 9 10 9 7 30 18

3 10 11 19 12 7 2 14 15 13 10 40 25

4 14 15 25 16 9 3 18 20 17 13 49 32

5 17 18 31 20 11 4 22 25 21 16 56 39

6 20 22 36 24 13 5 27 29 25 19 62 45

7 23 25 42 28 15 5 31 33 29 22 67 51

8 26 28 47 31 17 6 35 37 33 25 72 56

9 29 32 52 35 19 7 39 41 37 28 76 61

10 32 35 56 38 21 7 43 45 40 31 79 65

11 35 38 61 42 22 8 47 49 44 33 82 69

12 38 40 65 45 24 9 51 52 47 36 84 73

13 40 43 69 49 25 9 54 55 51 39 87 77

14 43 46 73 52 27 10 58 58 54 41 89 80

15 46 49 77 55 28 11 61 61 57 43 90 83

16 48 51 80 58 30 12 65 64 60 46 92 85

17 51 54 83 61 31 12 68 67 63 48 93 88

18 53 56 86 64 32 13 71 70 66 50 94 90

19 55 59 89 67 33 14 74 72 68 52 95 92

20 58 61 91 70 34 14 77 75 71 54 96 93

Références

Documents relatifs

Four groups of determinants of small area variations in outpatient antibiotic use are included in the model defined by equation (1): (i) the incidence of infections; (ii)

Provided that they explain the largest proportion of small area variations in antibiotic consumption, the remaining unexplained differences are plausibly related to differences

Our model of a spatial ecological network of trophic and mutualistic interactions sug- gests that: (1) the type of HL strongly mediates changes in sta- bility in terms of

Taken together, the psychophysical data and modeling results suggest that (1) FM detection for a modulation rate of 2 Hz and low carrier frequencies probably depends on a cue or

For a principal type pseudodifferential operator, we prove that condition (ψ) implies local solvability with a loss of 3/2 derivatives.. We use many elements of Dencker’s paper on

They can be computed using calibration experiments and then chosen depending on I 0 (or, even better, I n in eq. Given the data shown on figure 5, intensity decrease can be

unemployment increases of 1979-86 developed from steep decline in industrial employment and they were unevenly distributed and convert into high levels of regional nonwork in

Unité de recherche INRIA Rennes : IRISA, Campus universitaire de Beaulieu - 35042 Rennes Cedex (France) Unité de recherche INRIA Rhône-Alpes : 655, avenue de l’Europe -