Effects of Underwater Sound Simulating the Intermediate Scale Measurement System on Fish and Zooplankton of Lake Pend Oreille, Idaho

Bennett, David; Falter, C. Michael; Chipps, Steven R.; Niemela, Kevin; Kinney, John M.

doi:10.21236/ada280373

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 32 publications

(61 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several other sets of data are worth noting. A non‐peer‐reviewed study on the effects of 100, 800 and 5600 Hz sounds from 105 to 167 dB re 1 μPa on eggs and embryos in Lake Pend Oreille (Idaho, U.S.A) reported normal survival or hatching (Bennett et al ., 1994). However, few data were provided that could be used to evaluate the results.…”

Section: Eggs and Larvaementioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of anthropogenic sources of sound on fishes

Popper

Hastings

2009

Journal of Fish Biology

342

270

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is increasing concern about the effects of pile driving and other anthropogenic (human-generated) sound on fishes. Although there is a growing body of reports examining this issue, little of the work is found in the peer-reviewed literature. This review critically examines both the peer-reviewed and 'grey' literature, with the goal of determining what is known and not known about effects on fish. A companion piece provides an analysis of the available data and applies it to estimate noise exposure criteria for pile driving and other impulsive sounds. The critical literature review concludes that very little is known about effects of pile driving and other anthropogenic sounds on fishes, and that it is not yet possible to extrapolate from one experiment to other signal parameters of the same sound, to other types of sounds, to other effects, or to other species.

show abstract

Section: Eggs and Larvaementioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of anthropogenic sources of sound on fishes

Popper

Hastings

2009

Journal of Fish Biology

342

270

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The effects of intense sound on aquatic organisms have received little study (National Research Council 1994). Intense sounds can cause a several-hour-long loss in hearing sensitivity of goldfish (Popper and Clarke 1976), but intense sounds are not known to damage developing eggs (Bennett et al 1994). Little else is known about the ''macro'' effects of sound on fish, and even the few studies that have been done are not readily comparable since they used very different signals and experimental paradigms.…”

Section: Effect Of Sound On the Ear And Lateral Linementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another uncertainty is whether intense sounds can harm invertebrates and other animals that cannot (or not easily) leave the region of ensonification. Perhaps the only relevant study was by Bennett et al (1994), who evaluated the effects of 100, 800, and 5,600 Hz at relatively low sound pressures (105-167 dB re: 1 Pa) on several organisms in Lake Pend Oreille, Idaho. They found no effect on the development of fish eggs and little or no effect on zooplankton and fishes, with the exception that 800-Hz signals appeared to cause a significant decrease in predation on cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki by northern squawfish.…”

Section: Effect Of Sound On the Ear And Lateral Linementioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Sound and other Stimuli to Control Fish Behavior

Popper

Carlson

1998

Transactions of the American Fisheries Society

170

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the application of several sensory signals for their possible use in the control and modification of fish behavior but emphasizes the use of sound. Basic principles of underwater acoustics are introduced, followed by an overview of the structures and function of the fish ear and lateral line. Sounds in the sonic, infrasonic, and ultrasonic ranges are potentially useful for controlling fish behavior. However, most experiments testing the usefulness of such sounds have given ambiguous results except when ultrasound has been used to control some clupeid species. Very little is known about the potential usefulness of chemical and electric signals (other than electric shocks) for behavioral control. A substantial literature on the use of light to attract or repel fish offers encouraging possibilities for this control medium in some circumstances. We conclude that too little is actually known about the suitability of various signals for control of fish behavior. Many variables, such as time of day and age of the fish, affect the effectiveness even of signals that seem to ''work.'' These variables can influence the success or failure of a technique and need to be considered in the evaluation of any stimulus considered for the control fish behavior. Moreover, it is increasingly apparent that flow field has a powerful effect on the local success of one stimulus or another. We suggest that sound and light be further explored for control of fish behavior, particularly in combination. This work cannot be done with only field studies or only laboratory studies or by only applied biologists or only basic scientists; all methods and expertise are needed. Finally, no behavioral control method will work unless the behavior of the subject species is thoroughly understood in each place of application. environments have been explored, including the use of sound, light, electrical stimuli, and water flow. Of these signals, sound has received the most attention as a behavioral modifier. Sound has the advantage over other stimuli of being rapidly transmitted over long distances and of being unaffected by water turbidity or time of day.This paper provides a detailed discussion of sound as a potential tool for the control of fish

show abstract