By Rachel Yukimura

Clearly, elephants have an advantage over us when it comes to free long-distance communication. According to Garstang, a study which involved the recording of vocalizations from eight captive African elephants found that only five percent of the recorded calls did not contain any low-frequency components (801). O’Connell-Rodwell explains that “elephants may benefit from the exploitation of seismic cues as an additional communication modality, thus expanding their signaling repertoire and extending their range of potential communication and eavesdropping beyond that possible with airborne sound” (“Elephant” 2554). Because elephants are high social creatures, communication between family members and others is absolutely key to survival.

O’Connell-Rodwell explains that elephants “hear” low-frequency calls, those that make seismic waves, through their feet: “They freeze, lean forward, and press their feet into the ground” (Norlander 5). When scientists broadcast recorded low-frequency elephant calls to wild African elephants, animals that were within 1.2 to 2 kilometers of the loudspeaker responded by vocalizing, lifting and spreading their ears while remaining motionless in concentration, and moving their heads from side to side (Ben-Ari 4). Elephants often move their enormous ears around for better reception: “the listening elephant spreads its earflaps forward, effectively transforming its head into a satellite dish” (Burdick 11).

Under what circumstances might elephants benefit from low-frequency vocalizations, be they vibrations travelling through the air or through the ground? Garstang suggests that such vocalizations transmit information about size, age, sex, and sexual and physical status (791). Hogen and others have suggested that elephants can detect the seismic waves created when rain hits the ground; this would explain how elephants know in which direction to head for rain that is still many miles away (1).

Female elephants are in estrus, meaning that they are receptive to males and can conceive, for a period of two to six days. During this time they make low-frequency estrus calls which can be detected by males up to ten kilometers away (Garstang 802). Low-frequency vocalizations can also be helpful in resource utilization. Family groups can communicate with each other over distances of a few kilometers as they forage for food, ensuring that each group feeds along a different corridor of vegetation (802). Similarly, family groups can warn each other of danger and call each other together in order to protect their young. Unrelated family groups use low-frequency vocalizations to steer clear of each other, in order to avoid violent conflicts (802). Garstang describes the elephant’s world in terms of its communications:

The acoustic world of this highly social animal is a pervasive one extending from intimate contact to distances up to a few hundred kilometers. Even the immediate acoustic environment created by conspecifics can occupy over 300 km² (802).

Imagine what our world would be like if we had the elephant’s finely-tuned abilities to perceive low-frequency sounds and seismic waves. We would be able to converse with ease through walls and buildings, across forests and parking lots, from one side of campus to the other. We would be hearing, at any given moment, a huge number of conversations in which we were not involved, noises that would hit our ears and feet from all directions and from all different kinds of sources. We might be more comfortable walking alone in the city, as we could hear all things occurring around us for miles. It might also be more difficult to fall asleep at night, especially when the house on the other side of town throws its Friday-night parties.

It may come as a surprise to the modern city-dweller that many scientists believe our species has made use of low-frequency sounds and seismic waves for communication. Zulu tribesmen in southern Africa call to one another in long, low-pitched tones across valleys that are over a mile across (Ben-Ari 4). Native Americans could detect the seismic waves created by stampeding bison, following the vibrations to their prey (O’Connell-Rodwell, “Exploring” 3). Australian Aborigines could have used the low-frequency sound waves from the digeredoo and the seismic waves created by a traditional stomping dance as forms of communication (9). Indeed, scientists have found that the human foot is nearly as sensitive as the tip of the elephant’s trunk, which happens to be the most touch-sensitive animal organ (Burdick 13).

It is indeed fascinating to realize how similar our lives might have been to the lives of other species. To our description of a world where humans can detect and understand low-frequency sounds and seismic waves we can now add elephant conversations, not to mention the conversations of multitudinous other animals that also use such phenomena to transmit messages, including lions, birds, wolves, monkeys, frogs, insects, lizards, prairie dogs, caimans, amphibians, and rhinoceroses (Norlander 4). With this new understanding of the complexity of communication in the animal kingdom, perhaps we humans, with our cell phones, faxes and e-mails, can better appreciate and respect the creatures that survived for so long without any costly technology. “While our consciousness of the Umwelt of these animals is increasing, this understanding is dependent upon delineating the boundaries of their acoustic world” (Garstang 804). “Umwelt,” a German term, can be translated as “subjective universe” or “environment.” Perhaps, in our efforts to save such threatened creatures as the elephant, we can meditate on the fact that the Umwelt of humanity and the Umwelt of the beast were once one and the same.

About the Author:

Rachel Yukimura, a Seattle native, is a senior at USC working towards a major in biology, as well as minors in environmental studies and flute performance. Her post-graduation plans include two years with the Peace Corps with one of their environmental projects, and graduate school, studying conservation biology. Rachel is an officer for the student organizations Environment First, the USC Progressive Alliance, and the Vegan/Vegetarian Club.

Works Cited

• Ben-Ari, Elia T. “A Throbbing in the Air.” Bioscience 49 (1999): 353-358.
• Burdick, Alan. “Four Ears to the Ground.” The Best American Science and Nature Writing. Ed. Richard Dawkins. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2003. 11-14.
• Court, Paula. “Elephants make long-distance calls.” Boy’s Life 92 (2002): 11.
• Garstang, Michael. “Atmospheric Controls on Elephant Communication.” The Journal of Experimental Biology 198 (1995): 939-951.
• ---. “Long-distance, low-frequency elephant communication.” The Journal of Comparative Physiology 190 (2004): 791-805.
• Gunther, Roland H., et al. “Seismic waves from elephant vocalizations: A possible communication mode?” Geophysical Research Letters 31 (2004): L11602.
• Hogan, Dan. “Look who’s ‘talking’.” Current Science 83 (1998): 4-6.
• McComb, Karen. “Long-distance communication of acoustic cues to social identity in African elephants.” Animal Behaviour 65 (2003): 317-329.
• Norlander, Britt. “GOOD Vibrations.” Science 60 (2004): 15-19.
• O’Connell-Rodwell, Caitlin E., et al. “Elephant low-frequency vocalizations propagate in the ground and seismic playbacks of these vocalizations are detectable by wild African elephants (Loxodonta africana).” Architectural Acoustics 115 (2004): 2554.
• ---. “Exploring the potential use of seismic waves as a communication channel by elephants and other large mammals.” American Zoologist 41 (2001): 1157-1170.
• Stone, Richard. “Listening in on elephant love.” Science 286 (1999): 671.