1. The effects of music on fish behavior
Ryla Best
Abstract
The experiment investigated the effects that different styles of music (Classical, Techno,
Rock, Pop, and Scream-o) have on the behavior of different species of fish (Xiphophorus
maculatus- red wag platy, Poecilia reticulate- yellow guppy, and Corydoras aeneus- green cory
catfish). Three different species of freshwater community fish we obtained in a 37.9 liter tank
where five different styles of music were played with 30 minute intervals in between each song.
The fish behavior and pectoral fin movements were recorded for five days. However, there was
no significant correlation between pectoral movements and music selection due to the fish’s lack
of auditory sense toward the background music regardless of genre.
Introduction
Hearing in fishes has been studied in numerous ways. Sound is an important aspect of
fish for communication, navigation, exploration, and exploitation of their aquatic environment
since it can travel five times faster than air and does not weaken quickly compared to other
signals such as light or chemicals (Hawkins and Myrberg, 1983). Fish are often subjected to
stressful situations that can negatively affect growth (Rowland et al., 2006), reproduction
(Campbell et al., 1994), and immune response (Vazzana el al., 2002). A fish response to sound
might range from no change in behavior to fish exhibiting a mild awareness of sound or a
startled response (Wardle et al. 2001). Small temporary movements for the duration of the sound
may also be displayed to larger movements that might displace fish from their normal locations
for short or long periods of time (Slotte et al. 2004).
Page 1
2. Fish auditory sense is based on the detection of sound pressure that involves the
combined functions of the otolith organs (inner ear), lateral line, and swimmbladder (Fay and
Popper, 2000). For some fish, there is a connection between the inner ear and the swimbladder
through the Weberian ossicles, while others have the swimbladder directly entering the cranium
of the fish. Fish having a close association between the swimbladder and the inner ear are
sensitive to sound pressure (Hawkin 1986). High sound sensitivity in fish is characterized by the
presence of a prootic bulla, a gas-containing sphere evolved from the bones of the ear capsule
that work together with the swimbladder (Blaxter 1980). Hearing in goldfish (Carassius
auratus), is an example of a hearing-specialist fish that was susceptible to noise-induced stress
and hearing loss with a significant threshold shift in hearing after 10 minutes of noise exposure
(Smith, Kane, and Popper 2003). Medium sound sensitivity is characterized by the swimbladder
without the direct coupling so the frequency range is restricted. Low sound sensitivity is
characterized by the lack of swimbladder, therefore the fish would have to rely on the detection
of particle displacement (Turnpenny and Nedwell 1994). However, an example of a fish with
very poor sound sensitivity that has a swimbladder would be Corydoras compared to most
catfish (Ladich 1999).
The red wag platy, yellow guppy, and green cory catfish was chosen as the test subjects
because of their different water column preferences with the yellow guppy preferring the top
column, the red wag platy preferring the middle column, and the green cory catfish preferring the
bottom column. The pectoral fin of fish is mainly used for location. By observing the pectoral fin
movement, it can be hypothesized that the increase movement would be the cause of an
environmental disturbance such as background music and induce stress on the fish.
Page 2
3. Materials and methods
Three male red wag platys (Xiphophorus maculatus), three male yellow guppies
(Poecilia reticulate), and three male green cory catfish (Corydoras aeneus) were obtained by
PetSmart, a commercial supplier in Corpus Christi. The platys were identified as P1 with having
his left pectoral fin damaged and distinct black spots, P2 had a light shaded black tail, and P3 had
a smaller thinner tail. The guppies were identified as G1 with having a long pony-like tail, G2
had the second largest tail, and G3 had the smallest tail. The catfish were identified as C1 being
the largest in size, C2 being the second largest, and C3 being the smallest. The trial was carried
out in an apartment in Corpus Christi, Texas. All the fish were placed in a standard 37.9 L tank
(78°C, pH: 7) with colored gravel at the bottom and five fake plants which they were accustomed
to for five days. A set of Merkury vertical flat black speakers (200Hz-12KHz frequency, 50mm
length) where placed on the side the tank where it was connected to a laptop. Using the iTunes
program, the selected songs were used for the experiment: Piano Sonata No. 16 by Mozart
(Classical), Illusion by Benni Benassi (Techno), Monster by Skillet (Rock), Call Me Maybe by
Carly Rae Jepsen (Pop), and I Am Ghost by Bone Garden (Scream-o). The songs were played for
a minute each starting with a no music period. A 30 minute interval of silence was displayed
during each song exchange. The fish behavior and pectoral fin movement was recorded for five
days. Flake food was only offered before the trial and later at night.
Page 3
4. Results
Before the experiment took place, the second largest cory catfish (C2) died and a few
days after, the largest yellow guppy (G1) got caught in the filter and was removed from the tank.
Only results from P1, P2, P3, G2, G3, C1, and C3 were recorded. Only behavioral changes and
unusual movements were recorded.
Figure 1: Diagram of experimental tank setup (front view)
Figure 2: Stacked line graph of average pectoral fin movement vs. each indivisual fish
during each music phase.
Page 4
5. Figure 3: Bar graph of total average pectoral fin movement vs. each music type.
Fish Behavior Analysis- Trial 1
Fish Behavior Analysis- Trial 2
Fish Behavior Analysis- Trial 2
Page 5
8. Discussion
The results obtained in the experiment demonstrated that music did not have a significant
effect on fish behavior. During some of the trials, the fish would remain stationary at the same
exact spot, even if music was played or changed to a new song. These movement patterns were
to be expected (Wardle et al. 2001, Slotte et al. 2004). During other instances, there would be
brief movements or the guppies and platys would swim toward the speaker out of curiosity, then
swim back. Mainly the guppies and platys were more concerned of themselves by looking at
their reflection from the glass tank than the music playing. All the fish at one point preferred to
be closer to the heater where they felt the most comfortable and probably ignored the
background music. There was little to no movement from the cory catfish. The catfish mainly
moved to clean the tank or get some air because as bottom dwellers and Corydoras, they have
very poor sound sensitivity compared to other catfish so they probably did not hear or care about
the music in the background regardless of genre (Ladich 1999). In other studies, the effect of
music and interaction effect of light by music were not significant on growth performance
(Imanpoor, Enayat, and Zolfaghari, 2011).
The results acquired may be due to the faulty of the experimental design. The music from
the speakers did not create large ripples in the water which is usually an indication of loud sound
waves that would travel longer distances in the water. Since the water is more dense than air, the
sound was well muted as it passed through the water. Even with techno music playing in the
background with its lower octave sounds of the bass, the speakers would have to be touching the
tank or have better speakers that could produce a more quality sound. Overall, sound travels very
well in water but not so well transferring sound from air to glass to water. Inside movement in
the tank is going to be much louder to the fish than anything outside the tank. If a waterproof
Page 8
9. speaker was used, the results would be more accurate. Due to the inaccuracy of the experiment, it
did not matter so much as to what kind of column fish species was used. However, if a high
sensitivity fish like a goldfish was used; differential results may be clearly recognized (Smith,
Kane, and Popper 2003).
Based on the results in the present study, it was found that music did not significantly
affect fish behavior. Fish may be able to distinguish music from other environmental stressful
sounds. By studying music that effects fish physiology would be a good future experiment or the
music effects on learning behavior in fish.
Page 9
10. References
Blaxter, J.H.S. (1980). Fish Hearing. Oceanus, Senses of the Sea. 23(3), 27-33.
Campbell, P. M., Pottinger,T. G. and Sumpter, J. P. (1994). Preliminary evidence that chronic
confinement stress reduces the quality of gametes produced by brown and rainbow trout.
Aquaculture, 120, 151–169.
Fay, R. R., and Popper, A. N. (2000). Evolution of hearing in vertebrates: the inner ears and
processing. Hearing Research, 149, 1-10.
Hawkins, A. D. and Myrberg, A. A. (1983). Hearing and sound communication underwater.
Bioacoustics: A Comparative Approach. 347-405. London Academic Press.
Hawkins, A.D. (1986). Underwater Sound and Fish Behaviour. The Behaviour of Teleost Fishes.
114-151. Croom Helm Ltd, Beckenham.
Imanpoor, M. R., Gholampour, E. T., and Zolfaghari, M. (2011). Effect of Light and Music on
Growth Performance and Survival Rate of Goldfish (Carassius auratus). Iranian Journal of
Fisheries Sciences. 10(4), 641-653.
Ladich F. (1999). Did auditory sensitivity and vocalization evolve independently inotophysan
fishes? Brain Behav Evol. 53:288–304.
Rowland, S. J., Mifsud, C., Nixon, M. and Boyd, P. (2006). Effects of stocking density on the
performance of the Australian freshwater silver perch (Bidyanus bidyanus) in cages.
Aquaculture. 253, 301–308.
Slotte A, Kansen K, Dalen J, Ona E. (2004). Acoustic mapping of pelagic fish distribution and
abundance in relation to a seismic shooting area off the Norwegian west coast. Fisheries
Research. 67, 143–50.
Page
10
11. Smith, M. E., Kane, A. S. and Popper, A. N. (2004). Noise-induced stress response and hearing
loss in goldfish (Carassius auratus). J. Exp. Biol. 207, 427-435.
Turnpenny, A.W.H. and Nedwell, J.R. (1994). The Effects on Marine Fish, Diving Mammals
and Birds of Underwater Sound Generated by Seismic Surveys. Fawley Aquatic Research
Laboratories Consultancy Report. No. FCR 089/94, for UKOOA.
Vazzana, M., Cammarata, M., Cooper, E. L. and Parrinello, N. (2002). Confinement stress in sea
bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) depresses peritoneal leukocyte cytotoxicity. Aquaculture. 210, 231–
243.
Wardle CS, Carter TJ, Urquhart GG et al. (2001). Effects of seismic air guns on marine fish.
Continental Shelf Research. 21, 1005–27
Page
11
