刊期:双月刊
主管单位:四川省科学技术协会
主办单位:四川省动物学会/成都大熊猫繁育研究基金会/四川省野生动植物保护协会/四川大学
地址:四川省成都市武侯区望江路29号四川大学生命科学学院内
邮编:610065
电话:028-85410485; 15881112385
传真:028-85410485
E-Mail:scdwzz@vip.163.com & scdwzz001@163.com
刊号:ISSN 1000-7083
        CN 51-1193/Q
国内发行代号:
国际发行代号:
发行范围:国内外公开发布
定价:50元/册
定价:300元/年

您所在位置:首页->过刊浏览->2020年第39卷第6期

音频驱鸟设备对野生喜鹊最佳驱除模式研究
The Optimal Bird-Repellent Model of Audio-Bird-Repellent for Wild Pica pica
谢将剑1, 李星光1, 杨俊1, 齐涛1, 杨紫合1, 王楠2*
点击:203次 下载:22次
DOI:10.11984/j.issn.1000-7083.20200067
作者单位:1. 北京林业大学工学院, 北京 100083;
2. 北京林业大学生态与自然保护学院, 北京 100083
中文关键字:喜鹊;音频驱鸟;驱鸟模式
英文关键字:Pica pica; audio-bird-repellent; bird-repellent model
中文摘要:喜鹊Pica pica是北京地区引起鸟害的常见种类,现有音频驱鸟设备对其驱除效果有限,而驱鸟声音和模式直接影响驱除效果。以喜鹊的惨叫声、惊叫声和枪声3种类型声音为基础构建不同的驱鸟模式,通过野外实验探寻有效的驱除模式。记录不同声强、声音类型、声音组合和播放频次下喜鹊的行为反应,分析喜鹊逃离行为发生的概率,并以此评估驱鸟效果。结果表明:距离相同时,声强越大,驱鸟效果越好;声强相同时,单声惊叫、惨叫以及枪声的驱除效果之间的差异无统计学意义(P=0.202),重复3次时,惊叫声和惨叫声比对应单声的驱除效果更好(惊叫声:P=0.004,惨叫声:P=0.005),不同时间间隔下惊叫声的驱除效果之间的差异有统计学意义(P=0.043),而时间间隔对惨叫声和枪声的驱除效果影响不大(枪声:P=0.773,惨叫声:P=0.364),不同时间间隔的不同声音组合中,枪声-惊叫-惨叫间隔0.5 s模式的驱除效果最优(P=0.046)。选择不同类型的声音、间隔时间和声音组合可以对喜鹊产生不同的驱除效果,采用高强度的、更符合自然环境下喜鹊行为反应的驱鸟模式,可以达到更好的驱除效果,并可延长驱鸟效果的时效。
英文摘要:Pica pica is a common species causing bird damage in Beijing. The existing bird-repeller has limited effects. Bird-repellent sounds and models directly affect the effect of bird-repeller. In this study, in-field experiments were designed based on 3 kinds of sounds including distress call, alarm call of P. pica and gunshot, and then different bird-repellent models were constructed to achieve the efficient repellent model. Subsequently, the behaviors of P. pica in different bird-repellent models were observed, and the probability of bird escape was calculated to assess the effect of bird-repellent. The results indicated that: at the same distance, the greater the sound intensity, the better the repelling effect. Under the same sound intensity, there was no significant difference among the repelling effects of single distress call, alarm call and gunshot (P=0.202). When the sound was repeated for 3 times, the effects of distress call and alarm call were better than those of corresponding single sound (alarm call: P=0.004, distress call: P=0.005). The differences in the repelling effects of alarm call at different intervals was more significant (P=0.043), but the effect of distress call and gunshot repeatedly played at different intervals were not different (gunshot: P=0.773, distress call: P=0.364). Among the repelling effects of sounds with different combinations and different time intervals, the model of gunshot-alarm call-distress call with 0.5 s interval was the best (P=0.046). This study reveals that the selection of different types of sound, the interval and the sound combination has a significant impact on the repelling effect. The use of a high-strength bird repellent model similar with the behavioral response of bird in natural environment can achieve a better repelling effect, and may extend the time limit of bird-repellent effect.
2020,39(6): 630-638 收稿日期:2020-02-24
分类号:Q959.7;S764.1
基金项目:国家自然科学基金项目(31670553);国家电网有限公司科技项目(SGGR0000WLJS1801082);中央高校基本科研业务费专项(2016ZCQ08)
作者简介:谢将剑(1988-),副教授,研究方向:机器学习在生态信息处理中的应用,E-mail:shyneforce@bjfu.edu.cn
*通信作者:王楠,副教授,E-mail:8854100@qq.com
参考文献:
陈洪莲. 2020. 一种智能高仿真仿生驱鸟器设计[J]. 科学技术创新, 5: 155-156.
胡灿实, 李海洋, 叶元兴, 等. 2012. 不同驱鸟情景模式对果园害鸟行为的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 31(9): 2365-2370.
娄志凯. 2016. 驱鸟系统下的鸟类识别与跟踪技术的应用研究[D]. 重庆: 重庆师范大学.
杨敏, 刘贵婷. 2020. 基于微波探测的果园智能声光驱鸟器的设计及制作[J]. 农业技术与装备, 2: 35-37. 杨小勇. 2014. 双因素无重复的方差分析法[J]. 实验科学与技术, 12(5): 33-35.
袁佳炜, 石复习. 2019. 新型声光组合农田驱鸟装置设计[J]. 农业工程, 9(6): 101-105.
张国清. 2019. 机器人声光报警驱鸟器[J]. 农村电工, 27(9): 30.
张洁, 赵欣如, 肖华. 2011. 北京常见鸟类鸣声特征分析及其在驱鸟技术中的应用[J]. 四川动物, 30(2): 182-185.
张逸鹤. 2019. 基于华北地区机场鸟情状况的驱鸟机器人设计[J]. 机械工程与自动化, 2: 167-168.
赵亮. 2013. 定向声波鸟击防范系统信号处理技术研究[D]. 四川: 中国民用航空飞行学院.
Baral S, Swarnkar R, Kothiya A, et al. 2019. Bird repeller-a review[J]. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 8(2): 1035-1039.
Berge A, Delwiche M, Gorenzel WP, et al. 2007. Bird control in vineyards using alarm and distress calls[J]. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 58(1): 135-143.
Bishop J, Mckay H, Parrott D, et al. 2003. Review of international research literature regarding the effectiveness of auditory bird scaring techniques and potential alternatives[J]. Journal of Food and Rural Affairs, 1(1): 1-48.
Harris RE, Davis RA. 1998. Evaluation of the efficacy of products and techniques for airport bird control [EB/OL]. (1998-03)[2020-01-10]. LGL report TA2193.31, limited for aerodrome safety branch, transport Canada. https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/publications/tp13029-menu-1503.htm.
Ribot RF, Berg ML, Buchanan KL, et al. 2011. Fruitful use of bioacoustic alarm stimuli as a deterrent for crimson rosellas (Platycercus elegans)[J]. Emu-Austral Ornithology, 111(4): 360-367.
Seamans TW, Gosser AL. 2016. Bird dispersal techniques[R].Wildlife damage management technical series. 2. U.S. Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service: 1-13.
Tupper SK, Cummings JL, Andelt WF, et al. 2011. Evaluation of Sonic Dissuader® to reduce damage by pileated woodpeckers[J]. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 35(1): 40-44.
读者评论

      读者ID: 密码:   
我要评论:
国内统一连续出版物号:51-1193/Q |国际标准出版物号:1000-7083
主管单位:四川省科学技术协会  主办单位:四川省动物学会/成都大熊猫繁育研究基金会/四川省野生动植物保护协会/四川大学
开户银行:中国工商银行四川分行营业部东大支行(工行成都东大支行营业室)  帐户名:四川省动物学会  帐号:4402 2980 0900 0012 596
版权所有©2021四川动物》编辑部 蜀ICP备08107403号-3
您是本站第9418253名访问者

川公网安备 51010702000173号