The date are of the highest amplitudes across the frequency range of Weddell seal tonal trills (an underwater call made by males). Each column presents the results of a frequency amplitude measure that is relative to the highest amplitude of that trill, independent of the frequency at which that amplitude occurs. This removes the influence of the overall amplitude of the call which is influence of the distance the sea was from the hydrophone when the recording was made. Four trill patterns were identified (A - D) and a number of trills not included in the analyses are classed as type X. The X call types were excluded because the original recording was later found to be overloaded or partly masked by ice noises or the calls of another seal. Analysis details are included in the accompanying manuscript. The accompanying Excel file contain the frequency amplitude measurements of individual trills at two location groups: the Aurora Truning location at the anchorage location of the Aurora Australis near Davis and the other group is a number of breeding groups in the Vestfold Hills. Variable A is the frequency in Hz, Variables B to DH at the Aurora Turning location and B to BY at the Davis locations are data from individual trills. Rows 2 or 3 indicate the four Trill patterns, A, B, C or D, with an X designation for trills that were not included in the analyses due to limited frequency ranges or overloading of the original recordings (that was discovered later in the analyses). ssize or samplesize is the number of trills that were at each frequency bin.

Recordings were made of adult male and female Weddell seals on the ice during the breeding seasons of 1990 and 1997. The recordings were made near Davis, Antarctica in the Vestfold Hills. The vocalisations made with both the mouth and nostrils closed were classified into call types. These call types are also produced by the seals when underwater. The call classifications were based on those described by Thomas, J.A. and Kuechle,, V.B. (1982, J. Acoust. Soc. Amer. 72: 1730-1738) and Pahl, B.C., Terhune, J.M. and Burton, H.R. (1997, Aus. J. Zool. 45: 171-187). Nineteen call types were identified. Of these, males made 18 and females made 15. Trills are only made by males and it is likely that a stepped ascending whistle is only made by females. A roar and mew are also potential male-only call types. The data suggest that the Trill vocalisations can be used to indicate the presence of males. This will be useful when recording underwater where the calling seals cannot be observed directly. A description of the types of calls made by Weddell Seals is listed below. SymbolNameDescription OToneConstant-frequency, predominantly sinusoidal call. LGrowlConstant-frequency, broad bandwidth, long call. QWhoopConstant-frequency call with a terminal upsweep. SSqueakBrief call with constant frequency or rising frequency and an irregular waveform. WAWhistle AscendingAscending frequency, sinusoidal waveform. TCTrill Constant-FrequencyNarrow bandwidth trill with a constant-frequency beginning, sinusoidal or frequency-modulated waveform. TTrillNarrow to broad bandwidth, containing a frequency downsweep, greater than 2 seconds. WDWhistle DescendingDescending frequency, sinusoidal waveform (less than 2 seconds). MMewAbruptly descending frequency followed by a long constant-frequency ending. CChugAbruptly descending frequency followed by a brief constant-frequency ending. GGuttural Glug (Grunt)Descending-frequency call that was lower than a Chug and had a brief duration. WAGWhistle Ascending - GruntBrief Ascending Whistle followed by a Guttural Glug (Grunt), the two types alternate in a regular pattern. KKnockAbrupt, brief-duration broadband sound

From the abstract of the attached paper: Vocal recognition may function as a critical factor in maintaining the phocid mother-pup bond during lactation. For vocal recognition to function, the caller must produce individually distinct calls that are recognised by their intended recipient. Mother-pup vocal recognition has been studied extensively in colonial otariids and appears to be characteristic of this family. Although less numerous, empirical studies of phocid species have revealed a range of recognition abilities. This study investigated whether Weddell seal (Leptonychotes weddellii) females produce individually distinct 'pup contact' calls that function during natural pair reunions. Fifteen calls from each of nine females recorded in the Vestfold Hills, Antarctica were analysed. One temporal, nine fundamental frequency and five spectral characteristics were measured. Results of the cross-validated Discriminant Function Analysis revealed that mothers produce individually distinct calls with 56% of calls assigned to the correct individual. The probability of achieving this level of discrimination on novel data by chance alone is highly improbable. Analysis of eight mother-pup reunions recorded near McMurdo Sound, Antarctica further demonstrated that these 'pup contact' calls function during natural pair reunions. Behavioural analysis also revealed that pups were chiefly responsible for establishing and maintaining close contact throughout the reunion process. Our study therefore demonstrates that Weddell seal females produce calls with sufficient stereotypy to allow pups to identify them during pair reunions, providing evidence of a functioning mother-pup vocal recognition system. Column A - Row 1: Gives the tag number of the female. - Rows 3-33: The list of acoustic measurements recorded from the spectrograms. - Rows 3-5: Temporal measurements recorded in milliseconds. - Rows 7-12: Frequency measurements recorded from the fundamental frequency. Rows 9-11 were measured at the 1/4, 2/4 and 3/4 temporal positions along the fundamental frequency respectively. - Rows 13-17: Give the number of the frequency band with the most energy at the temporal positions stated (i.e. fundamental frequency band=1, first harmonic=2 etc). - Rows 19-29: List the fundamental frequency measurements, taken at the temporal positions stated, used to calculate Mean frequency (Row 31) and the Coefficient of Frequency Modulation (Row 33) using the formula listed in the publication. - Rows 35 and 36: List the cursor error margins of the acoustic analysis program I used. Columns B-P - Give details of the above mentioned acoustic characteristics for 15 replicate calls from each of the 9 females sampled.

Database Description The files represent the 41 different Weddell seal (Leptonychotes weddellii) call types identified at either Mawson, Davis, and/or Casey. They were collected between 60 degrees 49' E and 110o 40' E in longitude, and between 66 degrees 12' S and 68 degrees 34' S in latitude. Each call type name includes two elements. The first is a three-digit number starting at 301 to identify the call type. The second is a one to three-letter code referring to the call category that each type falls into. The 13 different possible call categories are: SymbolNameDescription OToneConstant-frequency, predominantly sinusoidal call. LGrowlConstant-frequency, broad bandwidth, long call. QWhoopConstant-frequency call with a terminal upsweep. SSqueakBrief call with constant frequency or rising frequency and an irregular waveform. WAWhistle AscendingAscending frequency, sinusoidal waveform. TCTrill Constant-FrequencyNarrow bandwidth trill with a constant-frequency beginning, sinusoidal or frequency-modulated waveform. TTrillNarrow to broad bandwidth, containing a frequency downsweep, greater than 2 seconds. WDWhistle DescendingDescending frequency, sinusoidal waveform (less than 2 seconds). MMewAbruptly descending frequency followed by a long constant-frequency ending. CChugAbruptly descending frequency followed by a brief constant-frequency ending. GGuttural Glug (Grunt)Descending-frequency call that was lower than a Chug and had a brief duration. WAGWhistle Ascending - GruntBrief Ascending Whistle followed by a Guttural Glug (Grunt), the two types alternate in a regular pattern. KKnockAbrupt, brief-duration broadband sound (from: Pahl, B.C., Terhune, J.M. and Burton, H.R. 1997). The 41 call types were divided into two sections, the first 33 (301-O to 333-K) being common call types and the last 8 (334-Q to 341-WD) being rare call types. In each call type folder, one to five different samples of each call type are provided. They are identified by a small case letter added at the end of the call type name. Each sample includes both a .WAV audio sample and a .JPG image of the call type spectrogram showing call shape, i.e., changes in call frequency (vertical) over time (horizontal). These call types were used to identify: (a) unique call types or call categories, (b) differences in call type or call category usage (the frequency of occurrence of each call type or category), and (c) differences in call features (number of elements, start frequency, frequency shift and first element duration) among the three stations. The download file also includes a spreadsheet of data and a text file explaining how to interpret the data. Analysis of this dataset is ongoing.

Many vocalisations produced by Weddell seals (Leptonychotes weddellii) are made up of repeated individual distinct sounds (elements). Patterning of multiple element calls was examined during the breeding season at Casey and Davis, Antarctica. Element and interval durations were measured from 405 calls all greater than 3 elements in length. The duration of the calls (22 plus or minus 16.6s) did not seem to vary with an increasing number of elements (F4.404 = 1.83, p = 0.122) because element and interval durations decreased as the number of elements within a call increased. Underwater vocalisations showed seven distinct timing patterns of increasing, decreasing, or constant element and interval durations throughout the calls. One call type occurred with six rhythm patterns, although the majority exhibited only two rhythms. Some call types also displayed steady frequency changes as they progressed. Weddell seal multiple element calls are rhythmically repeated and thus the durations of the elements and intervals within a call occur in a regular manner. Rhythmical repetition used during vocal communication likely enhances the probability of a call being detected and has important implications for the extent to which the seals can successfully transmit information over long distances and during times of high level background noise. See other metadata records and datasets associated with ASAC project 2122 (ASAC_2122) for further information. The fields in this dataset are: Tape/Site/File Filename Call Type Total Number of Elements Attribute Frequency Time Casey Davis

Underwater vocalisations of Weddell seals were recorded at Casey (1997) and Davis (1992 and 1997) Antarctica. The goal of the study was to determine if it would be possible to identify geographic variations between the Casey and Davis seals using easily measured, narrow bandwidth calls (and not broadband or very short duration calls). Two observers measured the starting and ending frequency (Hz), duration (msec) and number of elements (discrete sounds) of four categories of calls; long duration trills, shorter descending frequency whistles, ascending frequency whistles and constant frequency mews. The statistical analyses considered all calls per base, single and multiple element calls, and individual call types. Except for trills, discriminant function analysis indicated less variation between the call attributes from Davis in 1992 and 1997 than between either of the Davis data sets and Casey 1997. The data set contains measures from 2966 calls; approximately 1000 calls per base and year. Up to 100 consecutive calls were measured from each recording location per day of recording so the data set indicates the relative occurrence of each of the call types per base and year. There were very few ascending whistles at Casey. All of the trills and mews contained a single element. This data set was published in Bioacoustics 11: 211-222. The fields in this dataset are: Observer Station Location Time Call Number Call Type Frequency Duration Elements Overlap In 2011, another download file was added to this record, providing recording locations made during the project in 2010. Furthermore: In 1997 Daniela Simon made some opportunistic recordings for the project near Casey. The recording locations were: Berkley Island 110 38'E, 66 12' 40"S Herring Island 110 40'E, 66 25'S O'Brien Bay 110 31'E, 66 18' 30"S Eyres Bay 110 32'E, 66 29" 20"S The Davis sites: IN 1990 THERE WAS ONLY ONE RECORDING SITE - 78 12.5' E, 68 31.6' S IN 1997 RECORDINGS WERE MADE AT THE FOLLOWING SITES EAST SIDE OF WEDDELL ARM - 78 07.55' E 68 32.17' S PARTIZAN ISLAND - 78 13.66' E 68 29.57' S LONG FJORD - 78 18.95' E 68 30.24' S TOPOGRAV ISLAND - 78 12.40' E 68 29.33'S OFFSHORE - 77 58.73'E 68 26.35'S TRYNE BAY - 78 26.25'E 68 24.87'S LUCAS ISLAND - 77 57.00'E 68 30.36'S WYATT EARP ISLANDS - 78 31.51'E 68 21.31'S ================================================================================ The attached document is "a listing of the Weddell seal breeding locations near Mawson where Patrick Abgrall in 2000 and Phil Rouget in 2002 made underwater recordings". The sound recording effort in 2000 was not as high as it was in 2002, hence fewer locations are listed. The Abgrall sites are referred to in the paper 'Variation of Weddell seal underwater vocalizations over mesogeographic ranges' that Abgrall, Terhune Burton co-authored, published in Aquatic mammals in 2003. This paper also refers to the Casey and Davis sites above. The Rouget sites relate to the metadata record 'Weddell Seal underwater calling rates during the winter and spring near Mawson Station, Antarctica' Entry ID: ASAC_1132-1 In general the seals can create breathing holes in areas where tide cracks form, namely close to grounded icebergs, the shoreline and islands. I doubt that they could/would create breathing holes through solid 2 m ice.

Possible communication between territorial male Weddell seals (Leptonychotes weddellii) under the ice with females on the ice was investigated. In-air and underwater recordings of underwater calls were made at three locations near Davis, Antarctica. Most underwater calls were not detectable in air, often because of wind noise. In-air call amplitudes of detectable calls ranged from 32-74 dB re. 20 microPa at 86 Hz down to 4-38 dB re. 20 microPa at 3.6 kHz. Most of these would be audible to humans. Only 26 of 582 amplitude measurements (from 230 calls) ranged from 5 dB to a maximum of 15 dB above the minimum harbour-seal (Phoca vitulina) in-air detection threshold. Seals on the ice could likely hear a few very loud underwater calls but only if the caller was nearby and there were no wind noises. The low detectability of underwater calls in air likely precludes effective communication between underwater seals and those on the ice. See other metadata records and datasets associated with ASAC project 2122 (ASAC_2122) for further information. The fields in this dataset are: Column A: G = grunt, T = trill, CT = constant freq. trill, O = tone, C = chug, AW = ascending whistle, DW = descending whistle, L = growl, R - roar Column B: frequency (Hz) Column C: underwater call level NOTE dB re 20 uPa Column D: in-air call level dB re 20 uPa Column E: in-air background noise level at this frequency dB re 20 uPa Column F: water - air difference dB Column G: location, 1-3, see paper for code Column H: seal in-air threshold dB re 20 uPa Column I: human in-air threshold dB re 20 uPa Column J: seal in-air threshold at this frequency dB re 20 uPa