
IBP's Acoustic Monitoring Specialist Katelyn “Keke” Ray, M.S.
When you are learning a new subject, one important first step is to learn the terms used in that field of study. That’s why if you took Intro Biology, for example, you probably used flashcards to learn the definition of terms like “resting metabolic rate,” “ectotherm,” and “keystone species.” When researching a new idea, scientists sometimes have to create new terms with agreed upon definitions- that’s not always easy, even if they are all humans and speak the same language. Now imagine that you are trying to define the terms of another species’ “language” that you do not speak. Consider the Black-capped Chickadee. Is “chicka-dee-dee” equivalent to “chicka-dee-dee-dee-dee”? What about “fee-bee” and “fee-bee-bee”? By “fee-bee-bee” do you mean the “cheeseburger” call, or the one my colleague calls the “hey, sweetie” call? Confusion ensues.
In a study published in the journal Bioacoustics at the end of July, IBP Acoustic Monitoring Specialist Katelyn “Keke” Ray, along with co-authors from Western Michigan University, Syracuse University, and the City University of New York, used an analytical method called “fuzzy clustering” to quantify and describe alarm calls in Red-winged Blackbirds. This work was part of Keke’s master’s thesis. Fuzzy clustering probably has the most approachable and fun name of any statistical analysis we’ve heard of, but it's a powerful, and relatively new, way to define vocalizations more quantitatively, especially “graded” vocalizations in which the same call type can confer different information depending on its length or some other variation (e.g., the “chicka-dee-dee…” call in chickadees).
A video clip showing the spectrograms of each of the call types identified by fuzzy clustering, followed by the sound of each call type. SOUND ON.
Keke and colleagues recorded the vocalizations of 74 male Red-winged Blackbirds around Kalamazoo, Michigan to create a library of over 13,000 vocalizations. They then selected over 1,500 high quality recordings for analysis and included 50 different parameters, like duration or minimum frequency, per alarm call in the analysis. The researchers used a specific type of fuzzy clustering called “k-means” to identify the number of call types and the extent to which the calls shared acoustic features, and to define thresholds categorizing discrete, intermediate, and graded call structures. They found that male blackbirds used 6 different types of alarm calls: check, cluck, zeer, seee, se-er and ti-er. These call types shared acoustic features to varying extents. The researchers found that the “cluck” calls were discrete, meaning that there was little variation within that call type. The “zeer”, “see”, “se-er” and “ti-er” were graded calls, meaning that within each call type there was variation in one or more acoustic features (e.g., length, frequency, or number of syllables) and that there is more overlap between these different graded call types than between discrete call types. “Check” calls were intermediate, less discrete than “cluck” calls but less graded than the 4 graded calls. Previous studies of Red-winged Blackbird vocalizations defined calls qualitatively (subjectively) and some of these call types were lumped into a single type when the fuzzy clustering method was used. On the other hand, the fuzzy clustering method defined additional call types that qualitative methods lumped into a single call type: “cheer.”
We talked to Keke about the study and the interesting ideas that come up when studying animal communication.
What is the main idea that we should take away from this paper?
Having a somewhat standardized way to talk about and identify the call types of a species is very important if you want to look into the nitty gritty of the communication in a species and be able to draw comparisons across studies. Fuzzy clustering is an analytical method that can be used to differentiate call types, or quantify and describe differences in the calls of non-human animals. This is a helpful step for those looking to move forward in animal communication studies in a vocal species with a diverse repertoire. Fuzzy clustering worked surprisingly well with the blackbirds, and found 6 distinct call types that range from discrete to graded - matching previously described call types in some cases, but diverging in others.
It was interesting that even though you are making a good case for a quantitative method- in this case fuzzy clustering- there was still some human subjective judgement necessary (e.g., in the call factor extraction.) Do you think that there will always be some human subjective judgment required?

Keke Ray in the field and under attack during her master's research on Red-winged Blackbirds.
Yes, I do think that there will always be some subjective judgments to be made during this kind of work. It seems pretty important to vet model output for biological relevance (i.e., assessing the quality of the analysis by bringing in prior knowledge of the system.) It would be good for future studies to continue to test this in their own ways with Red-winged Blackbirds or any other vocal species. Taking good notes on exactly what decision was made, and why, for each step of the process is then pretty crucial.
It’s also interesting to think about what features of a vocalization that we as humans can perceive/hear and what we pay attention to, vs. what the blackbirds can hear and pay attention to, and finally what a computer can detect in the spectrogram of the vocalization and what the model analyzing the spectrograms thinks is important.
Perception of the sound, be it by us, or the Red-winged Blackbirds or other species, or the spectral analysis is a big study on its own! The cool thing about animal communication as a topic is that it starts delving into pretty heady topics quickly, like memory, planning, and cognition. Our understanding of what non-human animal experience is expanding but is still quite incomplete on a species to species basis - I like the idea of vocal communication as being an avenue into the minds of animals.
You bring up an intriguing idea in the paper’s conclusion. You write: "… more clarity surrounding the variation within calls and associated behaviors may contribute to the rapidly expanding species monitoring efforts that rely solely on autonomous recordings of vocalizations in the absence of sightings (Oestreich et al. 2024).” With the understanding that this is all strictly hypothetical at this point, can you elaborate on some ways clarifying and defining calls and their contexts with might be used in the future?
So hypothetically, say we know Red-winged Blackbirds make se-er calls primarily when they see aerial predators and ti-er calls when they see terrestrial predators (this is not validated, this is just an example.) Say we were interested in knowing how often our study site blackbirds dealt with various predator types - we could set out some autonomous recording units (ARUs,) build custom sound classifiers for each alarm call (se-er and ti-er), and have a pretty good idea of what the blackbirds experienced while the ARUs were out, without spending 3 months camped out in a marsh watching for accipiters and other predators.
This application of the work excites me quite a bit - about how we can expand the use of ARUs to not just detect the presence of a species, but detect an event, like a predator, or a behavior like aggression or defense. In a totally real example, Northern Yellow Warblers use seet calls to convey the presence of female Brown-headed Cowbirds. Using ARUs coupled with automated classifiers could help a researcher understand the prevalence of cowbirds in an area as their range continues to expand.

Keke's field technician, Katie Mauer, with a shotgun microphone that they used to record blackbird calls
What did you learn during this study, or your master’s research generally, that you use in your bioacoustics work with IBP?
I took a lot of data/project management skills away from my masters - mismanaging or poor planning with regards to acoustic data is a huge source of data loss, and I learned to think 10 steps ahead in the process to avoid that. I also got a pretty in-depth look into literature on non-human animal communication, and specifically bird communication. As I manage all these remotely collected acoustic data, and we design studies using ARUs, I ask myself a lot what we're able to 'see' with ARUs and what we're missing. The birds are saying a lot more than “I am here.” There is a lot more information in our recordings than presence/absence (of vocalizations)- so how do we decode that? We're not quite there in some ways, but I think we're moving in that direction!
What is your favorite male Red-winged Blackbird alarm call? Or favorite blackbird vocalization of any type?

A taxidermied female Brown-headed Cowbird that was attacked by a female Red-winged Blackbird that was defending her nest.
I love the ti-er call. It's very high-pitched and thin and a reminder of how spectacular their range is! I also really like the "growl" call - which didn't make it into our analysis because it's so rarely produced and does not record well, but is a broad-band, low frequency call that almost sounds like radio static. The growl is used primarily in close range aggressive attacks.
On our study site, we had a female bird that was so incredibly protective of her nest, particularly after the eggs had hatched, that when we put up a taxidermied female Brown-headed Cowbird near her nest for an experiment, she did her terrifying growl and proceeded to absolutely destroy the stuffed cowbird by perching on top of it and tearing out all the feathers. The “growl” call is the sound of a bird not taking any crap and I just kinda like that.


