First observations of anthropogenic underwater noise in a large multi-use lake

Bolgan, Marta; Chorazyczewska, Emilia; Winfield, Ian J.; Codarin, Antonio; O’Brien, Joanne; Gammell, Martin P.

doi:10.4081/jlimnol.2015.1405

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The groundwork for this was laid in the 1960s, when the response of cutthroat trout ( Oncorhynchus clarkii ) to natural noise levels in Yellowstone National Park was described by Stober (); since then, alterations in the levels of underwater noise have been measured in both lakes and rivers (Stober ; Amoser and Ladich ; Bolgan et al . ). At the same time, an increasing number of studies have identified direct impacts of anthropogenic noise on fish behavior (eg Lugli et al .…”

Section: Listening To Key Aquatic Groups and Processesmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Underwater acoustic monitoring and rivers (Stober 1969;Amoser and Ladich 2010;Bolgan et al 2016). At the same time, an increasing number of studies have identified direct impacts of anthropogenic noise on fish behavior (eg Lugli et al 2003), leading to the conclusion that noise can affect fish in multiple ways: by increasing stress levels, changing dispersal behaviors, and interfering with communication.…”

Section: Threat Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Freshwater ecoacoustics as a tool for continuous ecosystem monitoring

Linke

Gifford

Desjonquères

et al. 2018

Frontiers in Ecol & Environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Passive acoustic monitoring is gaining popularity in ecology as a practical and non‐invasive approach to surveying ecosystems. This technique is increasingly being used to monitor terrestrial systems, particularly bird populations, given that it can help to track temporal dynamics of populations and ecosystem health without the need for expensive resampling. We suggest that underwater acoustic monitoring presents a viable, non‐invasive, and largely unexplored approach to monitoring freshwater ecosystems, yielding information about three key ecological elements of aquatic environments – (1) fishes, (2) macroinvertebrates, and (3) physicochemical processes – as well as providing data on anthropogenic noise levels. We survey the literature on this approach, which is substantial but scattered across disciplines, and call for more cross‐disciplinary work on recording and analysis techniques. We also discuss technical issues and knowledge gaps, including background noise, spatiotemporal variation, and the need for centralized reference collection repositories. These challenges need to be overcome before the full potential of passive acoustics in dynamic detection of biophysical processes can be realized and used to inform conservation practitioners and managers.

show abstract

Section: Listening To Key Aquatic Groups and Processesmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Threat Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Freshwater ecoacoustics as a tool for continuous ecosystem monitoring

Linke

Gifford

Desjonquères

et al. 2018

Frontiers in Ecol & Environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Aquatic environments are particularly vulnerable due to the relatively low attenuation of sounds in water (Parks et al., ; Tyack & Janik, ). Freshwater environments are subjected to noise coming from sediment extraction, motorised boats, recreational activities, and construction (Bolgan et al., ). Noise pollution can result in injuries such as hearing loss, internal bleeding, or even death (Popper & Hastings, ; Popper & Hawkins, ; Popper et al., ), mask communication signals (Fletcher, ), or affect population sizes and density (Laiolo, ).…”

Section: Study Areas For Pam: Freshwater Ecoacousticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Measurements of the extent of anthropogenic noise in freshwater environments are still scarce (Bolgan et al., ). Predictive models of noise propagation are powerful tools for estimating the spread of noise impacted areas.…”

Section: Study Areas For Pam: Freshwater Ecoacousticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Passive acoustic monitoring as a potential tool to survey animal and ecosystem processes in freshwater environments

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biodiversity in freshwater habitats is decreasing faster than in any other type of environment, mostly as a result of human activities. Monitoring these losses can help guide mitigation efforts. In most studies, sampling strategies predominantly rely on collecting animal and vegetal specimens. Although these techniques produce valuable data, they are invasive, time‐consuming and typically permit only limited spatial and temporal replication. There is need for the development of complementary methods. As observed in other ecosystems, freshwater environments host animals that emit sounds, either to communicate or as a by‐product of their activity. The main freshwater soniferous groups are amphibians, fish, and macroinvertebrates (mainly Coleoptera and Hemiptera, but also some Decapoda, Odonata, and Trichoptera). Biophysical processes such as flow or sediment transport also produce sounds, as well as human activities within aquatic ecosystems. Such animals and processes can be recorded, remotely and autonomously, and provide information on local diversity and ecosystem health. Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) is an emerging method already deployed in terrestrial environments that uses sounds to survey environments. Key advantages of PAM are its non‐invasive nature, as well as its ability to record autonomously and over long timescales. All these research topics are the main aims of ecoacoustics, a new scientific discipline investigating the ecological role of sounds. In this paper, we review the sources of sounds present in freshwater environments. We then underline areas of research in which PAM may be helpful emphasising the role of PAM for the development of ecoacoustics. Finally, we present methods used to record and analyse sounds in those environments. Passive acoustics represents a potentially revolutionary development in freshwater ecology, enabling continuous monitoring of dynamic bio‐physical processes to inform conservation practitioners and managers.

show abstract

“…Freshwater bioacoustics to date has focussed less on ecological context, but mainly dealt with mechanistic descriptions of sound reception and sound production, as well as behavioural studies about communications (see Fine & Parmentier, ; Ladich, for overviews of the respective fields). A third group of studies has mainly researched the effect of noise on underwater organisms (Amoser & Ladich, ; Bolgan et al, ; see Popper & Hawkins, for a recent review).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Six steps towards operationalising freshwater ecoacoustic monitoring

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Applications in bioacoustics and its sister discipline ecoacoustics have increased exponentially over the last decade. However, despite knowledge about aquatic bioacoustics dating back to the times of Aristotle and a vast amount of background literature to draw upon, freshwater applications of ecoacoustics have been lagging to date. In this special issue, we present nine studies that deal with underwater acoustics, plus three acoustic studies on water‐dependent birds and frogs. Topics include automatic detection of freshwater organisms by their calls, quantifying habitat change by analysing entire soundscapes, and detecting change in behaviour when organisms are exposed to noise. We identify six major challenges and review progress through this special issue. Challenges include characterisation of sounds, accessibility of archived sounds as well as improving automated analysis methods. Study design considerations include characterisation analysis challenges of spatial and temporal variation. The final key challenge is the so far largely understudied link between ecological condition and underwater sound. We hope that this special issue will raise awareness about underwater soundscapes as a survey tool. With a diverse array of field and analysis tools, this issue can act as a manual for future monitoring applications that will hopefully foster further advances in the field.

show abstract

First observations of anthropogenic underwater noise in a large multi-use lake

Cited by 11 publications

References 9 publications

Freshwater ecoacoustics as a tool for continuous ecosystem monitoring

Freshwater ecoacoustics as a tool for continuous ecosystem monitoring

Passive acoustic monitoring as a potential tool to survey animal and ecosystem processes in freshwater environments

Six steps towards operationalising freshwater ecoacoustic monitoring

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About