4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Broadband acoustic backscatter and high-resolution morphology of fish: Measurement and modeling

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
卷 116, 期 2, 页码 747-761

出版社

ACOUSTICAL SOC AMER AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1121/1.1648318

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Broadband acoustic backscattering measurements, advanced high-resolution imaging of fish morphology using CT scans and phase-contrast x rays (in addition to traditional x rays), and associated scattering modeling using the images have been conducted involving alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus), a swimbladder-bearing fish. A greater-than-octave bandwidth (40-95 kHz) signal was used to insonify live, individual, adult alewife that were tethered while being rotated in 1-deg increments over all angles in two planes of rotation (lateral and dorsal/ventral). These data, in addition to providing the orientation dependence of the scattering over a continuous band of frequencies, were also used (after pulse. compression) to identify dominant scattering features of the fish (including the skull and swimbladder). The x-ray and CT scan images of the swimbladder were digitized and incorporated into two scattering models: (1) Kirchhoff-ray mode (KRM) model [Clay and Home, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 96, 1661-1668 (1994)] and (2) conformal-mapping-based Fourier matching method (FMM), which has recently been extended to finite-length bodies [Reeder and Stanton, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116. 729-746 (2004)]. Comparisons between the scattering predictions and data demonstrate the utility of the CT scan imagery for use in scattering models, as it provided a means for rapidly and noninvasively measuring the fish morphology in three dimensions and at high resolution. In addition to further validation of the KRM model, the potential of the new FMM formulation was demonstrated, which is a versatile approach, valid over a wide range of shapes, all frequencies and all angles of orientation. (C) 2004 Acoustical Society of America.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据