Fitness costs as well as benefits are important when considering responses to anthropogenic noise

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 4-7

  Read, Jade ^a   Jones, Gareth ^a   Radford, Andrew N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Acoustic communication; Anthropogenic noise; Costs and benefits; Fitness; Trade offs; Vocalizations

Indexed keywords

ANTHROPOGENIC EFFECT; BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY; BIOACOUSTICS; ENERGY BUDGET; FITNESS; NOISE; PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY; PREDATION RISK; TRADE-OFF;

EID: 84890727089     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/art102     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Ballentine B, Hyman J, Nowicki S. 2004. Vocal performance influences female response to male bird song: an experimental test. Behav Ecol. 15:163-168.
2. Banks AJ, Martin TE. 2001. Host activity and the risk of nest parasitism by brown-headed cowbirds. Behav Ecol. 12:31-40.
3. Barber JR, Crooks KR, Fristrup KM. 2009. The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms. Trends Ecol Evol. 25:180-189.
4. Bejder L, Samuels A, Whitehead H, Finn H, Allen S. 2009. Impact assessment research: use and misuse of habituation, sensitisation and tolerance in describing wildlife responses to anthropogenic stimuli. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 395:177-185.
5. Blickley JL, Blackwood D, Patricelli GL. 2012. Experimental evidence for the effects of chronic anthropogenic noise on abundance of Greater Sage-Grouse at leks. Conserv Biol. 26:461-471.
6. Brown TJ, Handford P. 2003. Why birds sing at dawn: the role of consistent song transmission. Ibis. 145:120-129.
7. Brumm H, Ritschard M. 2011. Song amplitude affects territorial aggression of male receivers in chaffinches. Behav Ecol. 22:310-316.
8. Brumm H, Slabbekoorn H. 2005. Acoustic communication in noise. Adv Study Behav. 35:151-209.
9. Brumm H, Zollinger SA. 2011. The evolution of the Lombard effect: 100 years of psychoacoustic research. Behaviour. 148:1173-1198.
10. Catchpole CK, Slater PJB. 2008. Bird song: biological themes and variations. Cambridge (MA): Cambridge University Press.
11. Eens M, Rivera-Gutierrez HF, Pinxten R. 2012. Are low-frequency songs sexually selected, and do they lose their potency in male-female interactions under noisy conditions? Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 109:208.
12. Francis CD, Ortega CP, Cruz A. 2009. Noise pollution changes avian communities and species interactions. Curr Biol. 19:1415-1419.
13. Francis CD, Ortega CP, Cruz A. 2011. Noise pollution filters bird communities based on vocal frequency. PLoS One. 6:e27052.
14. Fuller RA, Warren PH, Gaston KJ. 2007. Daytime noise predicts nocturnal singing in urban robins. Biol Lett. 3:368-370.
15. Gillooly JF, Ophir AG. 2010. The energetic basis of acoustic communication. Proc R Soc Lond B. 277:1325-1331.
16. Gross K, Pasinelli G, Kunc HP. 2010. Behavioral plasticity allows shortterm adjustment to a novel environment. Am Nat. 176:456-464.
17. Habib L, Bayne EM, Boutin S. 2007. Chronic industrial noise affects pairing success and age structure of ovenbirds Seiurus aurocapilla. J Appl Ecol. 44:176-184.
18. Haff TM, Magrath RD. 2011. Calling at a cost: elevated nestling calling attracts predators to active nests. Biol Lett. 7:493-495.
19. Halfwerk W, Bot S, Buikx J, van der Velde M, Komdeur J, ten Cate C, Slabbekoorn H. 2011. Low-frequency songs lose their potency in noisy urban conditions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 35:14549-14554.
20. Halfwerk W, Bot S, Slabbekoorn H. 2012. Male great tit song perch selection in response to noise-dependent female feedback. Func Ecol. 26:1339-1347.
21. Halfwerk W, Holleman LJM, Lessells CM, Slabbekoorn H. 2011. Negative impact of traffic noise on avian reproductive success. J Appl Ecol. 28:210-219.
22. Halfwerk W, Slabbekoorn H. 2009. A behavioral mechanism explaining noise-dependent frequency use in urban birdsong. Anim Behav. 78:1301-1307.
23. Hollén LI, Radford AN. 2009. The development of alarm call behaviour in mammals and birds. Anim Behav. 78:791-800.
24. Hu Y, Cardoso GC. 2010. Which birds adjust the frequency of vocalizations in urban noise? Anim Behav. 79:863-867.
25. Johnston RF. 2001. Synanthropic birds of North America. In: Marzluff JM, Bowman R, Donnelly R, editors. Avian ecology in an urbanizing world. Norwell (MA): Kluwer Academic Publishers. p. 49-67.
26. Kacelnik A, Krebs JR. 1983. The dawn chorus in the great tit (Parus major): proximate and ultimate causes. Behaviour. 83:287-309.
27. Kight CR, Swaddle JP. 2011. How and why environmental noise impacts animals: an integrative, mechanistic review. Ecol Lett. 14:1052-1061.
28. Klump GM, Shalter MD. 1984. Acoustic behaviour of birds and mammals in the predator context: I. Factors affecting the structure of alarm signals. II. The functional significance of alarm signals and their evolution. Z Tierpsychol. 66:189-226.
29. Krebs JR, Ashcroft R, Van Orsdol K. 1981. Song matching in the great tit Parus major. Anim Behav. 29:918-923.
30. Krebs JR, Ashcroft R, Webber MI. 1978. Song repertoires and territory defence. Nature. 271:539-542.
31. Lambrechts MM. 1996. Organisation of birdsong and constraints on performance. In: Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, editors. Ecology and evolution of acoustic communication in birds. Ithaca (NY): Cornell University Press. p. 305-320.
32. Lampe U, Schmoll T, Franzke A, Reinhold K. 2012. Staying tuned: grasshoppers from noisy roadside habitats produce courtship signals with elevated frequency components. Funct Ecol. 26:1348-1354.
33. Leonard ML, Horn AG. 2012. Ambient noise increases missed detections in nestling birds. Biol Lett. 8:530-532.
34. Lima SL, Dill LM. 1990. Behavioural decisions made under the risk of predation-a review and prospectus. Can J Zool. 68:619-640.
35. Lowry H, Lill A, Wong BBM. 2012. How noisy does a noisy miner have to be? Amplitude adjustments of alarm calls in an avian urban 'adapter'. PLoS One. 7:e29960.
36. Luther D, Baptista L. 2010. Urban noise and the cultural evolution of bird songs. Proc R Soc Lond B. 277:469-473.
37. Luther DA, Derryberry EP. 2012. Birdsongs keep pace with city life: changes in song over time in an urban songbird affects communication. Anim Behav. 83:1059-1066.
38. Marler P. 1955. Characteristics of some animal calls. Nature. 176:68.
39. McDonald MA, Hildebrand JA, Wiggins SM. 2006. Increases in deep ocean ambient noise in the Northeast Pacific west of San Nicolas Island, California. J Acoust Soc Am. 120:711-718.
40. McLaughlin KE, Kunc HP. 2013. Experimentally increased noise levels change spatial and singing behaviour. Biol Lett. 9:20120771.
41. Montague MJ, Danek-Gontard M, Kunc HP. 2013. Phenotypic plasticity affects the response of a sexually selected trait to anthropogenic noise. Behav Ecol. 24:343-348.
42. Morton ES. 1975. Ecological sources of selection on avian sounds. Am Nat. 109:17-34.
43. Nemeth E, Brumm H. 2009. Blackbirds sing higher-pitched songs in cities: adaptation to habitat acoustics or side-effect of urbanization? Anim Behav. 78:637-641.
44. Nemeth E, Brumm H. 2010. Birds and anthropogenic noise: are urban songs adaptive? Am Nat. 176:465-475.
45. Nemeth E, Kempenaers B, Matessi G, Brumm H. 2012. Rock sparrow song reflects male age and reproductive success. PLoS One. 7:e43259.
46. Oberweger K, Goller F. 2001. The metabolic cost of birdsong production. J Exp Biol. 204:3379-3388.
47. Okanoya K, Dooling RJ. 1988. Hearing in the swamp sparrow Melospiza georgiana, and the song sparrow Meospiza melodia. Anim Behav. 36:726-732.
48. Ortega CP. 2012. Effects of noise pollution on birds: a brief review of our knowledge. Ornith Monogr. 74:6-22.
49. Parks SE, Johnson M, Nowacek D, Tyack PL. 2011. Individual right whales call louder in increased environmental noise. Biol Lett. 7:33-35.
50. Patricelli GL, Blickley JL. 2006. Avian communication in urban noise: causes and consequences of vocal adjustment. Auk. 123:639-649.
51. Picciulin M, Sebastianutto L, Codarin A, Calcagno G, Ferrero EA. 2012. Brown meagre vocalization rate increases during repetitive boat noise exposures: a possible case of vocal compensation. J Acoust Soc Am. 132:3118-3124.
52. Proppe DS, Avey MT, Hoeschele M, Moscicki MK, Farrell T, St Clair CC, Sturdy CB. 2012. Black-capped chickadees Poecile atriapillus sing at higher pitches with elevated anthropogenic noise, but not with decreasing canopy cover. J Avian Biol. 43:325-332.
53. Purser J, Radford AN. 2011. Acoustic noise induces attention shifts and reduces foraging performance in three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus). PLoS One. 6:e17478.
54. Radford AN, Morley EL, Jones G. 2012. The effects of noise on biodiversity. Defra Report NO0235 [cited 2013 September 19]. Available from: http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Default.aspx?Menu=Menu&Module=More&Location= None&Completed=O&ProjectID=18136.
55. Ripmeester EAP, Vries AM, Slabbekoorn H. 2007. Do blackbirds signal motivation to fight with their song? Ethology. 113:1021-1028.
56. Schaub A, Ostwald J, Siemers BM. 2009. Foraging bats avoid noise. J Exp Biol. 211:3174-3180.
57. Slabbekoorn H. 2004. Singing in the wild: the ecology of birdsong. In: Marler P, Slabbekoorn H, editors. Nature's music-the science of birdsong. San Diego (CA): Elsevier Academic Press. p. 178-205.
58. Slabbekoorn H. 2013. Songs of the city: noise-dependent spectral plasticity in the acoustic phenotype of urban birds. Anim Behav. 85:1089-1099.
59. Slabbekoorn H, Bouton N, van Opzeeland I, Coers A, ten Cate C, Popper AN. 2010. A noisy spring: the impact of globally rising underwater sound levels on fish. Trends Ecol Evol. 25:419-427.
60. Slabbekoorn H, Peet M. 2003. Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise. Nature. 424:267.
61. Slabbekoorn H, Ripmeester EAP. 2008. Birdsong and anthropogenic noise: implications and applications for conservation. Mol Ecol. 17:72-83.
62. Tieleman BI, Williams JB. 2002. Effects of food supplementation on behavioural decisions of hoopoe-larks in the Arabian Desert: balancing water, energy and thermoregulation. Anim Behav. 63:519-529.
63. Tyack PL. 2008. Implications for marine mammals of large-scale changes in the marine acoustic environment. J Mamm. 89:549-558.
64. United Nations. 2011. World urbanization prospects: the 2011 revision. New York: United Nations [cited 2013 September 19]. Available from: http://esa.un.org/unup/pdf/WUP2011-Highlights.pdf.
65. Vargas-Salinas F, Amezquita A. 2013. Traffic noise correlates with calling time but not spatial distribution in the threatened poison frog Andinobates bombetes. Behaviour. 150:569-584.
66. Ward S, Lampe HM, Slater PJB. 2004. Singing is not energetically demanding for pied flycatchers, Ficedula hypoleuca. Behav Ecol. 15:477-484.
67. Wasserman FE, Cigliano JA. 1991. Song output and stimulation of the female in white-throated sparrows. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 29:55-59.
68. Watts RD, Compton RW, McCammon JH, Rich CL, Wright SM, Owens T, Ouren DS. 2007. Roadless space of the conterminous United States. Science. 316:736-738.
69. Wiley RH, Richards DG. 1982. Adaptations for acoustic communication in birds: sound propagation and signal detection. In: Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, editors. Acoustic communication in birds. Vol. 1. New York: Academic Press. p. 131-181.
70. Zahavi A. 1975. Mate selection: selection for a handicap. J Theor Biol. 53:205-214.
71. Zollinger SA, Goller F, Brumm H. 2011. Metabolic and respiratory costs of increasing song amplitude in zebra finches. PLoS One. 6:e23198.