生物多样性 ›› 2026, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (2): 25296.  DOI: 10.17520/biods.2025296  cstr: 32101.14.biods.2025296

• • 上一篇    下一篇

聆听生物多样性的未来:声景自动评估方法的局限性与发展方向

谢将剑, 朱梦坤, 蒋爱伍, 肖治术   

  1. 1. 多模生态数据智能分析实验室,北京林业大学工学院,北京 100083; 2. 林木资源高效生产全国重点实验室, 北京 100083; 3. 广西森林生态与保育重点实验室, 广西大学林学院, 南宁 530005; 4. 中国科学院动物研究所农业虫害鼠害综合治理研究国家重点实验室, 北京 100101
  • 收稿日期:2025-07-26 修回日期:2025-10-20 接受日期:2026-02-02 出版日期:2026-02-20
  • 通讯作者: 肖治术

The Future of Listening to Biodiversity: Limitations and Development Directions of Soundscape-Based Automatic Assessment Methods

Jiangjian Xie, Mengkun Zhu, Aiwu Jiang, Zhishu Xiao   

  1. 1.Multimodal Eco Data Intelligence Analysis Lab,School of Technology, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083

    2.State Key Laboratory of Efficient Production of Forest Resources, Beijing 100083, China

    3. Guangxi Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Conservation, College of Forestry, Guangxi University, Nanning 530005

    4. State Key Laboratory of Integrated Management of Pest Insects and Rodents in Agriculture, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China

  • Received:2025-07-26 Revised:2025-10-20 Accepted:2026-02-02 Online:2026-02-20
  • Contact: Zhishu Xiao
  • Supported by:
    Supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China(2024YFF1307202); the Beijing Natural Science Foundation(5252014); and Beijing Forestry University Science and Technology Innovation Program(2024XY-G002)

摘要: 随着全球生物多样性丧失风险的加剧,发展高效、低成本且可持续的生态监测技术已成为生态保护与管理的重要需求。被动声学监测(Passive Acoustic Monitoring, PAM)基于“声景”概念,通过连续记录环境中的生物声、地理声和人为声,为大尺度、生物多样性长期监测提供了新的技术路径。近年来,围绕声景数据的自动分析方法不断发展,其中自动识别法与声学指数法已成为当前声景生物多样性自动评估的两种主流技术路线。本文系统综述了上述两类方法的基本原理、应用现状及其在实际生态监测中的主要局限。重点分析了自动识别法在标注数据稀缺、背景噪声与声音混叠干扰、跨区域泛化能力不足等方面遇到的技术瓶颈,以及声学指数法在生态解释力有限、对环境与参数设置高度敏感、评估结果一致性不足等方面的问题。进一步从生物声多样性特征、环境干扰因素及数据采集策略等层面,归纳了导致不同研究间评估结果不一致甚至相互矛盾的综合原因。在此基础上,结合声学生态位假说与声学适应性假说,提出未来声景生物多样性评估的发展方向,包括数据采集与处理流程的标准化、声景特征数据库的共享与开放,以及自动识别法与声学指数法的融合创新与多源信息整合。本文旨在为构建更准确、稳健和可推广的声景生物多样性自动评估体系提供系统参考。

关键词: 声景评估, 生物多样性, 自动识别法, 声学指数法, 被动声学监测

Abstract

Background:Biodiversity loss driven by human activities and climate change has intensified the demand for efficient, scalable, and non-invasive monitoring approaches. Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM), based on the soundscape concept, captures biological, geophysical, and anthropogenic sounds over large spatial and temporal scales, providing a promising framework for biodiversity assessment. Because changes in species composition and habitat conditions are often reflected in soundscape structure, soundscape-based analysis has become a key component of ecoacoustics. 

Progress:Current soundscape-based biodiversity assessments mainly rely on two automated approaches: automatic recognition methods and acoustic index methods. Automatic recognition enables species- or sound-source-level identification using machine learning, but its performance is limited by the scarcity of annotated data, sensitivity to noise and sound overlap, and weak cross-regional generalization. Acoustic index methods offer computational efficiency by summarizing soundscape characteristics into numerical metrics, yet their ecological interpretability and robustness vary across habitats and environmental conditions, often leading to inconsistent or contradictory results. 

Prospects:Future progress requires standardized data acquisition and processing protocols, the development of open soundscape feature databases, and methodological integration of automatic recognition and acoustic index approaches. Combining these methods with multi-source environmental data is expected to enhance robustness, ecological interpretability, and comparability, supporting more reliable soundscape-based biodiversity monitoring and conservation decision-making.

Key words: soundscape assessment, biodiversity, automatic recognition, acoustic indices, passive acoustic monitoring