Landscape patterns of avian habitat use and nest success are affected by chronic gas well compressor noise

Francis, Clinton D.; Paritsis, Juan; Ortega, Catherine P.; Cruz, Alexander

doi:10.1007/s10980-011-9609-z

Cited by 109 publications

(81 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Small mammals depend on vegetation for cover and food, without which their populations cannot persist. Although artificial sound and light can influence prey abundance and availability (Francis et al 2011, Gaston et al 2013, changes to the vegetation from construction of human features on the landscape probably has a much larger impact on prey populations than noise or light (Andrén 1994, Sauvajot et al 1998, Mortelliti et al 2009). Most roads in the Canadian grasslands follow the 1 mile (~1.6 km) section lines originally laid out by the Dominion Land Survey of Canada in the late 1800s.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of human footprint and sensory disturbances on night-time space use of an owl

Scobie¹,

Bayne²,

Wellicome³

2016

Endang. Species. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Artificial sensory disturbances (sound and light) can extend far beyond the physical footprint of human development. Nocturnal predators such as owls may be influenced by artificial sound and light, as they depend on aural and visual cues when hunting. Owl nocturnal movements may also be altered by physical changes to the landscape, as these can affect prey availability. The burrowing owl population in Canada has declined by 90% and was classified as endangered in 1995. We tracked adult male burrowing owls Athene cunicularia with GPS dataloggers, and used resource selection models to examine their night-time movement patterns in relation to human infrastructure and associated artificial light and sound. The amount of sound and light from compressor stations, oil wells, traffic, towns and buildings was calculated for each owl and random location. We found that owl night-time space use was better predicted by distance to infrastructure on the landscape than by intensity of sensory disturbance. Burrowing owls did not show a pronounced avoidance of artificial sound. Infrastructure best predicts owl space use, perhaps because associated changes to vegetation alter prey abundance and availability. While human infrastructure most influenced owl nocturnal space use, the extent to which ecosystems are impacted by artificial sound and light is becoming clearer and needs to be considered when assessing the total effect of human development on species.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of human footprint and sensory disturbances on night-time space use of an owl

Scobie¹,

Bayne²,

Wellicome³

2016

Endang. Species. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…foraging behaviour, signalling characteristics, movement patterns) need more careful consideration because animals may be able to compensate in quieter periods, the implications of the behavioural change are unclear or there may be costs associated with the noiseinduced adjustment [14], and thus there may be no direct link between short-term effects and long-term consequences (see [67]). That is not to say changes in fitness do not result, but rather that the experiments required to determine them have rarely been carried out (but see [59,64,68,69]). A multiyear study by Francis et al [59] demonstrated that some species might actually gain from additional noise if, for instance, potential predators avoid the area, and thus implications for individual fitness and community structure are not necessarily easy to predict.…”

Section: (C) Need To Evaluate Effects Of Noise On Individual Fitnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of invertebrates when considering the impacts of anthropogenic noise

Morley¹,

Jones

Radford³

2014

Proc. R. Soc. B.

178

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anthropogenic noise is now recognized as a major global pollutant. Rapidly burgeoning research has identified impacts on individual behaviour and physiology through to community disruption. To date, however, there has been an almost exclusive focus on vertebrates. Not only does their central role in food webs and in fulfilling ecosystem services make imperative our understanding of how invertebrates are impacted by all aspects of environmental change, but also many of their inherent characteristics provide opportunities to overcome common issues with the current anthropogenic noise literature. Here, we begin by explaining why invertebrates are likely to be affected by anthropogenic noise, briefly reviewing their capacity for hearing and providing evidence that they are capable of evolutionary adaptation and behavioural plasticity in response to natural noise sources. We then discuss the importance of quantifying accurately and fully both auditory ability and noise content, emphasizing considerations of direct relevance to how invertebrates detect sounds. We showcase how studying invertebrates can help with the behavioural bias in the literature, the difficulties in drawing strong, ecologically valid conclusions and the need for studies on fitness impacts. Finally, we suggest avenues of future research using invertebrates that would advance our understanding of the impact of anthropogenic noise.

show abstract

“…For animals living in the vicinity of roads, traffic noise may impair their communication (Brumm and Slabbekoorn, 2005), change their vocal signals (Parks et al, 2011), interfere with predator-prey interactions (Siemers and Schaub, 2011) or act as a stressor affecting the neuroendocrine system (Rolland et al, 2012). Consequently, these effects may lead to the reduction of suitable habitats (Bayne et al, 2008), reduced reproductive success (Francis et al, 2011;Halfwerk et al, 2011a;Schroeder et al, 2012), decreased population size (Foote et al, 2004;Reijnen and Foppen, 2006), or altered evolutionary paths (Leonard and Horn, 2005;Luther and Baptista, 2010;Halfwerk et al, 2011b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are torpid bats immune to anthropogenic noise?

Luo

Clarin

Borissov

et al. 2013

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anthropogenic noise has a negative impact on a variety of animals. However, many bat species roost in places with high levels of anthropogenic noise. Here, we tested the hypothesis that torpid bats are insensitive to anthropogenic noise. In a laboratory experiment, we recorded skin temperature (T sk ) of bats roosting individually that were subjected to playbacks of different types of noise. We found that torpid bats with T sk~1 0°C lower than their active T sk responded to all types of noise by elevating T sk . Bats responded most strongly to colony and vegetation noise, and most weakly to traffic noise. The time of day when torpid bats were exposed to noise had a pronounced effect on responses. Torpid bats showed increasing responses from morning towards evening, i.e. towards the onset of the active phase. Skin temperature at the onset of noise exposure (T sk,start, 17-29°C) was not related to the response. Moreover, we found evidence that torpid bats rapidly habituated to repeated and prolonged noise exposure.

show abstract

Landscape patterns of avian habitat use and nest success are affected by chronic gas well compressor noise

Cited by 109 publications

References 29 publications

Influence of human footprint and sensory disturbances on night-time space use of an owl

Influence of human footprint and sensory disturbances on night-time space use of an owl

The importance of invertebrates when considering the impacts of anthropogenic noise

Are torpid bats immune to anthropogenic noise?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About