Passive acoustic monitoring shows no effect of anthropogenic noise on acoustic communication in the invasive round goby (<i>Neogobius melanostomus</i>)

Higgs, Dennis M.; Humphrey, Sarah

doi:10.1111/fwb.13392

Cited by 17 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 78 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In their study, restricting the recordings to periods of high activity of their indicator species actually reduced statistical noise. A similar pattern was found by both Higgs and Humphrey () and Grabowski, Young and Cott (), whose target species of fish were more active overnight. Again, scheduling will be dependent on the objective of the monitoring programme.…”

Section: Considering Multi‐scale Temporal Variationsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…The former study in particular discussed farther reaching consequences of noise pollution—noise can modify predator behaviour and therefore change the entire food web. The effect of noise on aquatic organisms will have to be quantified on a case‐by‐case basis though, as Higgs and Humphrey () did not find any effects on the round goby ( Neogobius melanostomus ).…”

Section: Links Between Sound and Ecological Conditionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The last—and extremely powerful application for passive acoustics is detection of invasive species. In this special issue, Higgs and Humphrey () describe application of passive acoustics to monitor the invasive round goby. Building autodetection algorithms for invasives would be a logical next step for early detection of invasive species like Tilapia or the Brown Bullhead Catfish.…”

Section: Links Between Sound and Ecological Conditionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This information can be used to build automatic classification algorithms, as can the characterisations by Grabowski, Young, and Cott (2020), who analysed spawning calls by soniferous burbot in northern Canada. Automatic detection algorithms are now widespread in terrestrial and marine systems, F I G U R E 3 Ecoacoustics can detect and monitor: (a) water-dependent birds and amphibians (Dema et al, 2020;Dutilleux & Curé, 2020;Indraswari et al, 2020;Linke & Deretic, 2020); (b) activity of aquatic insects and other invertebrates (Desjonquères, Rybak, et al, 2020;Gottesman et al, 2020;Linke, Decker, et al, 2020); (c) communication between fish (Grabowski et al, 2020;Hanache et al, 2020;Higgs & Humphrey, 2020;Linke, Decker, et al, 2020;Roca et al, 2020;Rountree & Juanes, 2020); (d) biophysical processes such as sediment transport and gas exchange (Gottesman et al, 2020;Linke, Decker, et al, 2020); (e) anthropogenic disturbance, for example boat and engine noises (Desjonquères, Rybak, et al, 2020;Higgs & Humphrey, 2020) [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]…”

Section: Char Ac Teris Ing Sounds and Linking O Ccurren Ce S To Orgmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ecoacoustics can detect and monitor: (a) water‐dependent birds and amphibians (Dema et al, ; Dutilleux & Curé, ; Indraswari et al, ; Linke & Deretic, ); (b) activity of aquatic insects and other invertebrates (Desjonquères, Rybak, et al, ; Gottesman et al, ; Linke, Decker, et al, ); (c) communication between fish (Grabowski et al, ; Hanache et al, ; Higgs & Humphrey, ; Linke, Decker, et al, ; Roca et al, ; Rountree & Juanes, ); (d) biophysical processes such as sediment transport and gas exchange (Gottesman et al, ; Linke, Decker, et al, ); (e) anthropogenic disturbance, for example boat and engine noises (Desjonquères, Rybak, et al, ; Higgs & Humphrey, ) [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

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

Section: Considering Multi‐scale Temporal Variationsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Links Between Sound and Ecological Conditionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Links Between Sound and Ecological Conditionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Char Ac Teris Ing Sounds and Linking O Ccurren Ce S To Orgmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Six steps towards operationalising freshwater ecoacoustic monitoring

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The role of freshwater bioacoustics in ecological research

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conventional methodologies used to estimate biodiversity in freshwater ecosystems can be nonselective and invasive, sometimes leading to capture and potential injury of vulnerable species. Therefore, interest in noninvasive surveying techniques is growing among freshwater ecologists. Passive acoustic monitoring, the noninvasive recording of environmental sounds, has been shown to effectively survey biota in terrestrial and marine ecosystems. However, knowledge of the sounds produced by freshwater species is relatively scarce. Furthermore, little is known about the representation of different freshwater taxonomic groups and habitat types within the literature. Here we present results of a systematic review of research literature on freshwater bioacoustics and identify promising areas of future research. The review showed that fish are the focal taxonomic group in 44% of published studies and were studied primarily in laboratory aquaria and lotic habitats. By contrast, lentic habitats and other taxonomic groups have received relatively little research interest. It is particularly striking that arthropods are only represented by 26% of studies, despite their significant contributions to freshwater soundscapes. This indicates a mismatch between the representation of taxonomic groups within the freshwater bioacoustic literature and their relative acoustic contribution to natural freshwater soundscapes. In addition, the review indicates an ongoing shift from behavioral studies, often with focus on a single taxonomic group, towards fieldbased studies using ecoacoustic approaches. On the basis of this review we suggest that future freshwater bioacoustics research should focus on passive acoustic monitoring and arthropod sound, which would likely yield novel insights into freshwater ecosystem function and condition.

show abstract

Adding insult to injury: anthropogenic noise intensifies predation risk by an invasive freshwater fish species

Fernandez-Declerck,

Rojas,

Prosnier

et al. 2023

Biol Invasions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ecological impact of invasive species is likely to be modulated by human-induced alterations in habitats, which represents another driver of biodiversity loss. We tested the effect of soundscape degradation on predation by the round goby Neogobius melanostomus, one of Europe's "worst invasive species". For this, we compared the relationship between per capita predation rate and prey density (i.e., the functional response) in the presence or absence of motorboat sounds. Unexpectedly, sh displayed a stronger functional response with additional noise, which could be explained by a higher mobility promoting encounters with prey. Our results suggest that anthropogenic noise is likely to exacerbate the impact of invasive species.

show abstract

Passive acoustic monitoring shows no effect of anthropogenic noise on acoustic communication in the invasive round goby (Neogobius melanostomus)

Cited by 17 publications

References 78 publications

Six steps towards operationalising freshwater ecoacoustic monitoring

Six steps towards operationalising freshwater ecoacoustic monitoring

The role of freshwater bioacoustics in ecological research

Adding insult to injury: anthropogenic noise intensifies predation risk by an invasive freshwater fish species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About