Integrating multiple disciplines to understand effects of anthropogenic noise on animal communication

Rosa, Patrícia da; Koper, Nicola

doi:10.1002/ecs2.2127

Cited by 39 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 148 publications

(283 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We therefore explored the interdisciplinary nature of impact assessment (cf. Rosa & Koper, ), focused on the abundant limitations in the data currently available, and provided an overview of relevant information and potential tools suitable for investigation once data become available. Critical for the evaluation is to understand (a) that effects on individual animals should be translated to consequences for stocks, populations, species, communities or whole ecosystems; and (b) that choices for spatial (local, regional, global) and temporal resolution (now, coming years or decades, forever) are likely to have a large impact on the outcome, while these choices can be regarded as political or strategic decisions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Population‐level consequences of seismic surveys on fishes: An interdisciplinary challenge

Slabbekoorn

Dalen

Haan³

et al. 2019

Fish and Fisheries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Offshore activities elevate ambient sound levels at sea, which may affect marine fauna. We reviewed the literature about impact of airgun acoustic exposure on fish in terms of damage, disturbance and detection and explored the nature of impact assessment at population level. We provided a conceptual framework for how to address this interdisciplinary challenge, and we listed potential tools for investigation. We focused on limitations in data currently available, and we stressed the potential benefits from cross‐species comparisons. Well‐replicated and controlled studies do not exist for hearing thresholds and dose–response curves for airgun acoustic exposure. We especially lack insight into behavioural changes for free‐ranging fish to actual seismic surveys and on lasting effects of behavioural changes in terms of time and energy budgets, missed feeding or mating opportunities, decreased performance in predator‐prey interactions, and chronic stress effects on growth, development and reproduction. We also lack insight into whether any of these effects could have population‐level consequences. General “population consequences of acoustic disturbance” (PCAD) models have been developed for marine mammals, but there has been little progress so far in other taxa. The acoustic world of fishes is quite different from human perception and imagination as fish perceive particle motion and sound pressure. Progress is therefore also required in understanding the nature and extent to which fishes extract acoustic information from their environment. We addressed the challenges and opportunities for upscaling individual impact to the population, community and ecosystem level and provided a guide to critical gaps in our knowledge.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Population‐level consequences of seismic surveys on fishes: An interdisciplinary challenge

Slabbekoorn

Dalen

Haan³

et al. 2019

Fish and Fisheries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another major mechanism that has been suggested to drive the deleterious impact of noise pollution on wildlife populations-and which may be particularly disruptive for acoustically communicating species, such as birds, frogs or marine mammals-is interference with signal and cue detection, i.e., masking acoustic communication between individuals or the sounds of an approaching predator or potential prey [3,11]. Noise can hinder animal communication by reducing the distance at which a signal can be detected [12], limiting the ability of the signal to reach its intended receiver, and decreasing the amount of information that can be extracted from a signal [13,14]. For example, it has been shown that noise pollution can reduce the ability of birds to collect information on their surroundings, increase their predation risk (by masking the sounds of predators), and interfere with signals that are crucial for their breeding success and parental care (e.g., [3,15,16]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What evidence exists on the effects of anthropogenic noise on acoustic communication in animals? A systematic map protocol

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Noise pollution is an intense, widespread anthropogenic disturbance that can have highly detrimental impacts on natural populations, communities, and ecosystems across the globe. One major way through which noise can affect wildlife is by masking acoustic signals that animals rely on and, in doing so, hindering inter-and intraspecific communication among individuals. In response, many animals change their vocal behavior in an attempt to overcome the signal-and cue-masking effects of noisy environments. This can be done by changing the amplitude of the vocal output, shifting its frequency, or changing its temporal structure. However, to date, we still know very little about the ecological contexts of signal modifications in animals or their fitness consequences. We present a protocol for a systematic map aiming to collect and characterize all research done on animals' signal modification in response to anthropogenic noise. The map will increase our understanding of the consequences of noise pollution on animal communication and may guide the development of new mitigation tools to alleviate any negative effects. The map will also allow us to identify gaps in the literature and highlight possible future research areas. Methods: We will collect information about different types of acoustic modifications in response to noise as well as information about the noise's source and properties. The map will also include the ecological context of the signal modification and the fitness consequences of the modification, if measured. We will search both commercially published literature and grey literature, and conduct the searches in academic journal databases, online search engines, and specialist websites. Articles will be screened for inclusion at title, abstract and full-text levels and will then be critically appraised for study robustness and validity. Data will then be extracted and coded according to categories informed by consultation with stakeholders. Data will be summarized in a quantitative manner, accompanied with a narrative review that will map our knowledge on how animals change their vocalizations in response to noise pollution as a function of their taxa, geographic location, noise pollution source, and vocalization type.

show abstract

“…The sensory characteristics of a bear receiving sounds will influence the potential effect from the noise source (Rosa and Koper 2018, Dominoni et al 2020). If the frequency of a sound is too high or too low or if it lacks sufficient amplitude to exceed auditory thresholds, it will not be audible even if detectable by instrumentation.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating the Audibility of Industrial Noise to Denning Polar Bears

Owen

Pagano

Wisdom³

et al. 2020

J Wildl Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oil and gas activities on Alaska's North Slope overlap spatially with polar bear (Ursus maritimus) maternal denning habitat and temporally with the peri‐partum and emergence periods. Noise associated with these activities can be substantial and concerns regarding the effects on polar bears have been acknowledged. But the secluded and ephemeral nature of subnivean maternal dens renders the measurement of behavioral and physiological responses of bears to noise exposure challenging, except for rare cases when disturbance‐prompted den abandonment has been documented. These limitations, coupled with the uncertainty associated with the synergistic effects of anthropogenic activities on bears in a rapidly changing Arctic, prompt the need to develop predictive models of disturbance to ensure management guidelines effectively mitigate disturbance. Towards this end, we characterized noise propagation from 9 sources (2 aircraft, 2 over‐tundra tracked vehicles, 4 wheeled on‐road vehicles, and humans walking) used to support industrial activities around artificial snow dens near Milne Point, Alaska, USA, in March–April 2010. We built dens in 4 configurations to mimic variability in den roof thickness and to evaluate differences in noise propagation from when the den was closed compared to being open, similar to den emergence. We integrated these data with an existing polar bear audiogram and developed models to predict auditory‐detection probabilities as a function of distance from the den. Within a closed den, aircraft had high probabilities (detection probability ≥75%) of being detected by polar bears at distances ≤1.6 km and ground‐based sources had high probabilities of detection at distances ≤0.8 km. On average, closed dens reduced noise levels by 15 decibels (dB) relative to open dens. Our findings indicate that although polar bear snow dens effectively attenuate acoustic sound pressure levels, noise from some industrial support vehicles was likely to be detected farther from dens than previously documented. These results reinforce the importance of maintaining buffer zones around polar bear dens to minimize the potential for den disturbance. © 2020 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

Integrating multiple disciplines to understand effects of anthropogenic noise on animal communication

Cited by 39 publications

References 148 publications

Population‐level consequences of seismic surveys on fishes: An interdisciplinary challenge

Population‐level consequences of seismic surveys on fishes: An interdisciplinary challenge

What evidence exists on the effects of anthropogenic noise on acoustic communication in animals? A systematic map protocol

Estimating the Audibility of Industrial Noise to Denning Polar Bears

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About