The ability of a benthic elasmobranch to discriminate between biological and artificial electric fields

Kimber, Joel A.; Sims, David; Bellamy, P.; Gill, Andrew B.

doi:10.1007/s00227-010-1537-y

Cited by 29 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Noise from the turbines may potentially increase stress levels in fish or harm internal communication by masking sound signals used by the fish (Andersson 2011, Popper & Hawkins 2012). Changes in electromagnetic fields may de crease foraging efficiency in species that use their electromagnetic sense for detecting prey, such as elasmobranchs (Kimber et al 2011, Gill et al 2012, or potentially disturb fish migration (Wes terberg & Begout-Anras 2000, Westerberg & Lagenfelt 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of an offshore wind farm on temporal and spatial patterns in the demersal fish community

Bergström

Sundqvist²,

Bergström³

2013

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rapid increase in offshore wind energy worldwide has raised concern about its potential risks to marine biodiversity due to habitat alteration, disturbance from noise and electromagnetic fields. This study presents results of surveillance studies performed at the Lillgrund wind farm in Sweden to investigate the integrated effects of these factors on the abundance and distribution patterns of benthic fish communities. The studies revealed no large-scale effects on fish diversity and abundance after establishment of the wind farm when compared to the development in 2 reference areas. Changes in some species and in community composition were observed over time but occurred in parallel in at least one reference area, indicating that fish communities in the wind farm area were mainly driven by the same environmental factors as those in surrounding areas. However, changes at smaller spatial scales were evident. Increased densities of all studied piscivores (cod, eel, shorthorn sculpin), as well as the reef-associated goldsinny wrasse, were observed close to the foundations in the first years of operation. The increase was probably attributed mainly to local changes in distribution rather than to immigration or increased local productivity. Simultaneously, weak or no aggregation of black goby, eelpout and shore crab, all potentially reef-associated but also prey species of the studied piscivores, was observed, which may indicate enhanced top-down control near the foundations.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of an offshore wind farm on temporal and spatial patterns in the demersal fish community

Bergström

Sundqvist²,

Bergström³

2013

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sharks and rays display innate feeding responses towards prey-simulating weak electric fields [Tricas, 1982;Kajiura, 2003;Wueringer et al, 2012]. One behavioral study indicates that the small spotted catshark Scyliorhinus canicula is unable to distinguish the biological electric fields of crustaceans from artificial dipole fields of the same strength [Kimber et al, 2011].…”

Section: Behavioral Responses Of Elasmobranchs To Electroreceptive Stmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The bioelectric fields that surround living organisms originate from three sources: the direct contact between membranes and the external medium creates DC potential differences, contractions of body cavities create low-frequency AC currents with frequencies of less than 10 Hz, while muscle action potentials cause ac currents with frequencies higher than 20 Hz [Kalmijn, 1972[Kalmijn, , 1974Haine et al, 2001;Kimber et al, 2011].…”

Section: Biologically Important Stimuli and Their Originsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electroreception in Elasmobranchs: Sawfish as a Case Study

Wueringer¹

2012

Brain Behav Evol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ampullae of Lorenzini are the electroreceptors of elasmobranchs. Ampullary pores located in the elasmobranch skin are each connected to a gel-filled canal that ends in an ampullary bulb, in which the sensory epithelium is located. Each ampulla functions as an independent receptor that measures the potential difference between the ampullary pore opening and the body interior. In the elasmobranch head, the ampullary bulbs of different ampullae are aggregated in 3–6 bilaterally symmetric clusters, which can be surrounded by a connective tissue capsule. Each cluster is innervated by one branch of the anterior lateral line nerve (ALLN). Only the dorsal root of the ALLN carries electrosensory fibers, which terminate in the dorsal octavo-lateral nucleus (DON) of the medulla. Each ampullary cluster projects into a distinctive area in the central zone of the DON, where projection areas are somatotopically arranged. Sharks and rays can possess thousands of ampullae. Amongst other functions, the use of electroreception during prey localization is well documented. The distribution of ampullary pores in the skin of elasmobranchs is influenced by both the phylogeny and ecology of a species. Pores are grouped in distinct pore fields, which remain recognizable amongst related taxa. However, the density of pores within a pore field, which determines the electroreceptive resolution, is influenced by the ecology of a species. Here, I compare the pore counts per pore field between rhinobatids (shovelnose rays) and pristids (sawfish). In both groups, the number of ampullary pores on the ventral side of the rostrum is similar, even though the pristid rostrum can comprise about 20% of the total length. Ampullary pore numbers in pristids are increased on the upper side of the rostrum, which can be related to a feeding strategy that targets free-swimming prey in the water column. Shovelnose rays pin their prey onto the substrate with their disk, while repositioning their mouth for ingestion and thus possess large numbers of pores ventrally around the mouth and in the area between the gills.

show abstract

“…Neither of these studies was designed to consider a range of field strengths, however, so it is difficult to be certain about an avoidance threshold. Nevertheless, other research has demonstrated unequivocal repeated, attraction behaviour to DC fields of ~ 60 µV m −1 (Kalmijn 1982;Kimber et al 2011) and some avoidance has been observed at levels of 400-600 µV m −1 (Kimber 2008). Perhaps the threshold between dipole E field attraction and avoidance lies somewhere between ~ 400 and 1,000 µV m −1 for catsharks, although other species-specific thresholds are likely to exist.…”

Section: Fishmentioning

confidence: 96%

Marine Renewable Energy, Electromagnetic (EM) Fields and EM-Sensitive Animals

Gill

Gloyne-Philips

Kimber

et al. 2014

Marine Renewable Energy Technology and Environmental Interactions

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the marine environment there are natural magnetic and electric fields associated with both physical and biological sources, and there are anthropogenic electromagnetic fields (EMFs) that permeate it. Many marine animals can detect electric and magnetic fields and utilize them in such important life processes as movement, orientation and foraging. Here, these EMFs are explored and discussed in terms of how they arise, their properties (particularly those that are measurable) and the animals that have the ability to detect them. Then the evidence base for whether anthropogenic EMFs can affect sensitive receptor animals is explored. As marine renewable energy developments (MREDs) expand rapidly worldwide, with multiple devices and networks of subsea cables that emit EMFs into the marine environment, it is necessary to focus on their interaction with marine animals. The MRED industry has to take EMFs into account, so the industry perspective is also covered. Finally, suggestions are made on how research on EMFs associated with MREDs (and other sources) and its interaction with marine animals should advance in future. Overview and TerminologyHumans are generally unaware that they live within an electromagnetic world. The concept that we are surrounded by charged particles may seem ethereal but is more real than generally acknowledged. We are familiar with an occasional lightning storm, but we are also bombarded continually with electromagnetic emissions from the sun and encompassed by the Earth's own geomagnetic field (and other sources, such as granite geology). At a local level, humans are immersed among anthropogenic electromagnetic emissions that emanate from the plethora of electrical appliances and technologies that have been developed to become part of everyday life.Animals with which humankind shares the environment are also exposed to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) both natural and anthropogenic in origin. Several animals are known to be able to detect EMFs (or more specifically the component electric and/or magnetic field) and to use them for activities that are vitally important in terms of resource gain and movement around their environment. This is particularly true of marine animals, many of which undertake large-scale movements that apparently follow the orientation of the Earth's geomagnetic field (Kirschvink 1997). Moreover, some animals possess specialist electroreceptive organs that can detect weak bioelectric fields emitted by their prey and conspecifics.Although knowledge of how marine animals use magnetic and electric fields is increasing, there is still scant understanding of how animals interact with anthropogenic sources of EMF. The purpose here, therefore, is to provide an overview of what is currently known about EMFs in the marine environment and to evaluate how electromagnetically sensitive receptor animals interact with the EMFs associated with marine renewable energy developments (MREDs). The latter are being developed to transform renewable sources of energy into electricity ...

show abstract

The ability of a benthic elasmobranch to discriminate between biological and artificial electric fields

Cited by 29 publications

References 32 publications

Effects of an offshore wind farm on temporal and spatial patterns in the demersal fish community

Effects of an offshore wind farm on temporal and spatial patterns in the demersal fish community

Electroreception in Elasmobranchs: Sawfish as a Case Study

Marine Renewable Energy, Electromagnetic (EM) Fields and EM-Sensitive Animals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About