Explicitely enlarge our SE community to all bioacoustics/biotremology/ecoacoustics/ecotremology fields?

Question

This slide is from a video of Rok Šturm, which classifies the study of sound communication into bioacousticians (water-borne and air-borne waves) and biotremologists (solid-surface-borne waves). Strictly speaking, both are bioacousticians in the meaning of studying communication via acoustic waves which propagate into any physical medium, but for some reasons biotremologists does not define themselves as bioacousticians.

No current questions are about solid-surface-borne bioacoustics in our SE site, so the biotremology community is not included now. Should we remain like this or expand the site area to enlarge the methodologies and to increase our chance to make this site viable in the long-term (we need many people involved)?

Traditionally regarded part of bioacoustics, the discipline [biotremology] has recently begun to actively diverge on its own, because of the many peculiarities of the studied modality compared with sound. Vibrational communication has been recognized as evolutionarily older than sound and much more prevalent, at least among arthropods,[6][7] although the two modalities are closely related and sometimes overlap.[8] While many experimental approaches are shared between the two disciplines, scientists in the field of biotremology often use special equipment, such as laser vibrometers, for detecting faint vibrational emissions by animals and electromagnetic transducers in contact with the substrate for artificial playback experiments. (from Wikipedia biotremology webpage)

Same question arises for people defining themselves as ecoacousticians / ecotrologists / soundscape ecologists

Soundscape ecology seeks a broader perspective [than bioacoustics] by considering soundscape effects on communities of living organisms, human and other, and the potential interactions between sounds in the environment. Compared to soundscape ecology, the discipline of bioacoustics tends to have a narrower interest in individual species’ physiological and behavioral mechanisms of auditory communication. (from Wikipedia ecoacoustics / soundscape ecology webpage)

I think we should define what we call "bioacoustics" in order to explicitly include (or exclude) these other fields. If we agree to include them, we should advertise the site in their communities by saying we need them because now there are too few here.

What do you think?

Answer 1

This is really interesting (and something I knew nothing about!) so thanks for bringing it up. IMO, I'd love to see the biotremology folks on here, but I'm not sure I have a good solution to make that happen.

Is there a place on the Bioacoustics SE that defines the site scope in a few sentences? I can't find that anywhere...but maybe I'm not looking in the right spot. If there is, I think adding some language to clarify that those folks would be welcome here would be great.

Maybe alternatively we could create some tags that are more specific to those fields and define them clearly with tag wikis.

It seems like having someone (or multiple someones) from that community chime in would be most helpful but I don't have any contacts in that research community.

Answer 2

We can refine our 'elevator pitch' to be inclusive of these fields and then let those communities decide if they want to participate? This might need time to cultivate this relationship, but by keeping the definition of our site inclusive, we can lay the foundation for working more closely with researchers in the biotremology & soundscape fields.

I encourage people to actively participate in the discussion of our 'elevator pitch' (see here).

Answer 3

So if some researchers feel that bioacoustics does not describe their field and need an own research direction, that is fine. All these fields in the question can easily be interpreted as relevant aspects of bioacoustics. So there should be no issue that someone who defines itself as biotremologist to participate as long we accept the Wikipedia description of acoustics

Acoustics is a branch of physics that deals with the study of mechanical waves in gases, liquids, and solids including topics such as vibration, sound, ultrasound and infrasound.

and the biological spin to it, which in IMHO can culminate in an improved understanding of the ecosystem.

Answer 4

I defined the differences between bioacoustics and biotremology in my answer here, which could help: https://bioacoustics.stackexchange.com/a/885/73

The key difference is that biotremologists do not deal with acoustic waves. Biotremologists deal with non-compressional (non-sound) waves travelling in boundaries between media. Many animals do not detect pressure at all, but other mechanical waves which we collectively call "substrate-borne vibration".

Biotremologists are not under the bioacoustics umbrella because of this. It is a separate discipline studying different mechanical waves, measured with sensors that detect particle acceleration, displacement or velocity (not pressure).

Both bioacoustics and biotremology fall under the broader term of bio-oscillology = the study of communication via mechanical waves. That term is little used and lesser known perhaps.

That said, some animals communicate multi-modally, using sound AND substrate-borne waves (and it's clearly difficult to separate these out in some cases)- this means that most biotremologists are also bioacousticians, and dabble between the two disciplines regularly since it's kind of a necessity. So, this stack exchange will still attract biotrem people, even if it's called "Bioacoustics"