bioRxivEcologyPreprint
Overcoming software bottlenecks for scalable passive acoustic monitoring: insights from a global expert assessment
Martino E. MalerbaiD, Kristian BelliD, Maria M PalaciosiD, Kristen BellisarioiD, Camille DesjonquèresiD, Alba Márquez‐RodrígueziD, Irene MendozaiD, Christoph F. J. MeyeriD, Vijay RameshiD, Xavier RaickiD, Tessa A. RhinehartiD, Connor M. WoodiD, Morgan A. ZiegenhorniD, Giuseppa BuscainoiD, Marconi Campos‐CerqueiraiD, Marina H. L. DuarteiD, Amandine GasciD, Tara Hanf‐DressleriD, Francis JuanesiD, Leandro Aparecido Do NascimentoiD, Rodney Alan RountreeiD, Karolin ThomischiD, Luís Felipe ToledoiD, Toka MosikidiiD, Manuel VieiraiD, Cristian Pérez‐GranadosiD
Abstract
1.Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) enables non-invasive sampling of wildlife across broad spatial, temporal and taxonomic scales. Its ongoing and widespread use has generated unprecedented volumes of acoustic data, shifting the primary bottleneck from data collection to the storage, processing, integration, and interpretation of PAM outputs. Although many software tools exist to address these challenges, differences in their design, scope, and usability often create fragmented and complex analytical workflows. To identify the key barriers and opportunities shaping the implementation of PAM surveys, we conducted a structured expert solicitation involving 30 international practitioners working across terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Experts identified and ranked their most critical pain points in current PAM workflows, spanning data storage, processing, and interpretation. The top challenge identified related to accurate species identification using deep learning and artificial intelligence (AI) models, especially in noisy soundscapes or for underrepresented taxa. Eight additional priority challenges included workflow fragmentation, limited availability of user-friendly analytical and visualisation tools, uneven access to software, manual validation bottlenecks, computational constraints, and difficulties in data handling, standardisation, and sharing. Participants also proposed practical mitigation strategies for these priority challenges, supported by step-by-step guidance to help overcome key barriers. Together, these insights provide a roadmap toward more scalable, open-access, and collaborative software systems, which are increasingly essential to realise the full potential of PAM in global biodiversity monitoring.
- Citations
- 1
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- PAMalytics: a no-code application for structured validation of bioacoustic detections
Alastair Pickering, Santiago Martínez Balvanera, … Jenna Lawson·bioRxiv·Aug 18, 2026
- monitoraSom: an easy path from Soundscapes to Ecology
Gabriel Lima Medina Rosa, Juan Pablo Zurano, … Carlos Barros de Araújo·BioacousticsPeer-reviewed·Apr 6, 2026
- Inadequate sampling of the soundscape leads to overoptimistic estimates of recogniser performance: a case study of two sympatric macaw species
T. C. Lewis, I. Gutierrez Vargas, … D. Childs·bioRxiv·Dec 29, 2022
- Big Data, Sound Science, Lasting Impact: a framework for passive acoustic monitoring
Carrie C. Wall, Megan F. McKenna, … Karolin Thomisch·Big Earth DataPeer-reviewed·Dec 4, 2025
- A Case Study: Using Passive Acoustic Monitoring Devices In A Growing Urban Landscape To Monitor Avian Diversity
Anshul Gupta, CS Swathi, … Harsha Kumar·bioRxiv·Jul 21, 2025
- Worldwide Soundscapes: a synthesis of passive acoustic monitoring across realms
Kevin Darras, Rodney Alan Rountree, … Bárbara Freitas·Global Ecology and BiogeographyPeer-reviewed·May 1, 2025