The effects of extended exposure to traffic noise on parid social and risk-taking behavior

Owens, Jessica L.; Stec, Courtney L.; O’Hatnick, Amy

doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2012.05.010

Cited by 29 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A noise-induced increase in vigilance has been commonly found (Rabin et al, 2006;Shannon et al, 2014Shannon et al, , 2016Meillère et al, 2015;, and could arise either directly (if noise is itself viewed as threatening; Frid and Dill, 2002;Owens et al, 2012) or indirectly (if animals are compensating for potential loss of acoustic information through masking; Beale and Monaghan, 2004;Rabin et al, 2006).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropogenic noise alters dwarf mongoose responses to heterospecific alarm calls

Morris-Drake

Bracken

Kern

et al. 2017

Environmental Pollution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. (0) 960028260, no fax number Statement of authorshipAll authors contributed to the conception and design of the study; AM and AB collected the data; AM and AB analysed the data with advice from JMK and ANR; ANR and AM wrote the first draft of the manuscript, and all authors contributed significantly to revisions. 2Anthropogenic noise is an evolutionarily novel and widespread pollutant in both terrestrial and aquatic habitats. Despite increasing evidence that the additional noise generated by human activities can affect vocal communication, the majority of research has focused on the use of conspecific acoustic information, especially sexual signals.Many animals are known to eavesdrop on the alarm calls produced by other species, enhancing their likelihood of avoiding predation, but how this use of heterospecific information is affected by anthropogenic noise has received little empirical attention.Here, we use two field-based playback experiments on a habituated wild population of dwarf mongooses (Helogale parvula) to determine how anthropogenic noise influences the response of foragers to heterospecific alarm calls. We begin by demonstrating that dwarf mongooses respond appropriately to the alarm calls of sympatric chacma baboons (Papio ursinus) and tree squirrels (Paraxerus cepapi); fleeing only to the latter.We then show that mongoose foragers are less likely to exhibit this flee response to tree squirrel alarm calls during road-noise playback compared to ambient-sound playback.One explanation for the change in response is that noise-induced distraction or stress result in maladaptive behaviour. However, further analysis revealed that road-noise playback results in increased vigilance and that mongooses showing the greatest vigilance increase are those that do not subsequently exhibit a flee response to the alarm call. These individuals may therefore be acting appropriately: if the greater gathering of personal information indicates the absence of an actual predator despite an alarm call, the need to undertake costly fleeing behaviour can be avoided. Either way, our study indicates the potential for anthropogenic noise to interfere with the use of acoustic information from other species, and suggests the importance of considering how heterospecific networks are affected by this global pollutant.Capsule: Anthropogenic noise reduces the likelihood of fleeing to a heterospecific alarm call.3

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropogenic noise alters dwarf mongoose responses to heterospecific alarm calls

Morris-Drake

Bracken

Kern

et al. 2017

Environmental Pollution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…M. Caro, 1998;Festa-Bianchet & Apollonio, 2003;Gosling & Sutherland, 2000), and its scope and utility have received considerable attention in recent literature (Angeloni, Schlaepfer, Lawler, & Crooks, 2008;T. Early on, conservation behavior research tended to focus on behaviors that affect population persistence (Anthony & Blumstein, 2000), while recent studies have commonly examined behavioral responses to anthropogenic impacts (Barber, Crooks, & Fristrup, 2010;Laiolo, 2010;Owens, Stec, & O'Hatnick, 2012;Shannon, Angeloni, Wittemyer, Fristrup, & Crooks, 2014;Slabbekoorn & Ripmeester, 2008;Templeton, Zollinger, & Brumm, 2016). Caro, , 2016T.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bioacoustic monitoring of animal vocal behavior for conservation

Teixeira

Maron

Rensburg

2019

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The popularity of bioacoustics for threatened species monitoring has surged. Large volumes of acoustic data can be collected autonomously and remotely with minimal human effort. The approach is commonly used to detect cryptic species and, more recently, to estimate abundance or density. However, the potential for conservationrelevant information to be derived from acoustic signatures associated with particular behavior is less well-exploited. Animal vocal behavior can reveal important information about critical life history events. In this study, we argue that the overlap of the disciplines of bioacoustics, vocal communication, and conservation behavior-thus, "acoustic conservation behavior"-has much to offer threatened species monitoring.In particular, vocalizations can serve as indicators of behavioral states and contexts that provide insight into populations as it relates to their conservation. We explore the information available from monitoring species' vocalizations that relate to reproduction and recruitment, alarm and defense, and social behavior, and how this information could translate into potential conservation benefits. While there are still challenges to processing acoustic data, we conclude that acoustic conservation behavior may improve threatened species monitoring where vocalizations reveal behaviors that are informative for management and decision-making. K E Y W O R D Sbioacoustics, conservation behavior, monitoring, vocal behavior, vocalizations

show abstract

“…For example, acoustic communication between individuals may be disrupted, fish may leave certain regions or habitats to get away from sound sources and they can even be injured or killed by noise (Kunc et al ., ; Purser & Radford, ). Anthropogenic noise may also negatively affect foraging (Purser and Radford, ; Voellmy et al ., ), predator avoidance (Voellmy et al ., ; Simpson et al ., ) and parental care (Nedelec, ; Owens et al ., ). All of these effects are immediate but may also have far‐reaching consequences for the fitness of fishes; i.e ., on the number and survival of offspring.…”

Section: Anthropogenic Influences On the Lateral‐line Systemmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Purser & Radford, 2011). Anthropogenic noise may also negatively affect foraging (Purser and Radford, 2011;, predator avoidance Simpson et al, 2015) and parental care (Nedelec, 2017;Owens et al, 2012). All of these effects are immediate but may also have far-reaching consequences for the fitness of fishes; i.e., on the number and survival of offspring.…”

Section: Acoustic Noisementioning

confidence: 99%

Sensory ecology of the fish lateral‐line system: Morphological and physiological adaptations for the perception of hydrodynamic stimuli

Mogdans

2019

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fishes are able to detect and perceive the hydrodynamic and physical environment they inhabit and process this sensory information to guide the resultant behaviour through their mechanosensory lateral‐line system. This sensory system consists of up to several thousand neuromasts distributed across the entire body of the animal. Using the lateral‐line system, fishes perceive water movements of both biotic and abiotic origin. The anatomy of the lateral‐line system varies greatly between and within species. It is still a matter of debate as to how different lateral‐line anatomies reflect adaptations to the hydrodynamic conditions to which fishes are exposed. While there are many accounts of lateral‐line system adaptations for the detection of hydrodynamic signals in distinct behavioural contexts and environments for specific fish species, there is only limited knowledge on how the environment influences intra and interspecific variations in lateral‐line morphology. Fishes live in a wide range of habitats with highly diverse hydrodynamic conditions, from pools and lakes and slowly moving deep‐sea currents to turbulent and fast running rivers and rough coastal surf regions. Perhaps surprisingly, detailed characterisations of the hydrodynamic properties of natural water bodies are rare. In particular, little is known about the spatio‐temporal patterns of the small‐scale water motions that are most relevant for many fish behaviours, making it difficult to relate environmental stimuli to sensory system morphology and function. Humans use bodies of water extensively for recreational, industrial and domestic purposes and in doing so often alter the aquatic environment, such as through the release of toxicants, the blocking of rivers by dams and acoustic noise emerging from boats and construction sites. Although the effects of anthropogenic interferences are often not well understood or quantified, it seems obvious that they change not only water quality and appearance but also, they alter hydrodynamic conditions and thus the types of hydrodynamic stimuli acting on fishes. To date, little is known about how anthropogenic influences on the aquatic environment affect the morphology and function of sensory systems in general and the lateral‐line system in particular. This review starts out by briefly describing naturally occurring hydrodynamic stimuli and the morphology and neurobiology of the fish lateral‐line system. In the main part, adaptations of the fish lateral‐line system for the detection and analysis of water movements during various behaviours are presented. Finally, anthropogenic influences on the aquatic environment and potential effects on the fish lateral‐line system are discussed.

show abstract

The effects of extended exposure to traffic noise on parid social and risk-taking behavior

Cited by 29 publications

References 54 publications

Anthropogenic noise alters dwarf mongoose responses to heterospecific alarm calls

Anthropogenic noise alters dwarf mongoose responses to heterospecific alarm calls

Bioacoustic monitoring of animal vocal behavior for conservation

Sensory ecology of the fish lateral‐line system: Morphological and physiological adaptations for the perception of hydrodynamic stimuli

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About