Literature DB >> 22438504

Noise pollution alters ecological services: enhanced pollination and disrupted seed dispersal.

Clinton D Francis1, Nathan J Kleist, Catherine P Ortega, Alexander Cruz.   

Abstract

Noise pollution is a novel, widespread environmental force that has recently been shown to alter the behaviour and distribution of birds and other vertebrates, yet whether noise has cumulative, community-level consequences by changing critical ecological services is unknown. Herein, we examined the effects of noise pollution on pollination and seed dispersal and seedling establishment within a study system that isolated the effects of noise from confounding stimuli common to human-altered landscapes. Using observations, vegetation surveys and pollen transfer and seed removal experiments, we found that effects of noise pollution can reverberate through communities by disrupting or enhancing these ecological services. Specifically, noise pollution indirectly increased artificial flower pollination by hummingbirds, but altered the community of animals that prey upon and disperse Pinus edulis seeds, potentially explaining reduced P. edulis seedling recruitment in noisy areas. Despite evidence that some ecological services, such as pollination, may benefit indirectly owing to noise, declines in seedling recruitment for key-dominant species such as P. edulis may have dramatic long-term effects on ecosystem structure and diversity. Because the extent of noise pollution is growing, this study emphasizes that investigators should evaluate the ecological consequences of noise alongside other human-induced environmental changes that are reshaping human-altered landscapes worldwide.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22438504      PMCID: PMC3367785          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2012.0230

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  16 in total

1.  The evolution of compensation to herbivory in scarlet gilia, Ipomopsis aggregata: herbivore-imposed natural selection and the quantitative genetics of tolerance.

Authors:  T Juenger; J Bergelson
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.694

2.  Foraging bats avoid noise.

Authors:  Andrea Schaub; Joachim Ostwald; Björn M Siemers
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 3.312

Review 3.  The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms.

Authors:  Jesse R Barber; Kevin R Crooks; Kurt M Fristrup
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2009-09-15       Impact factor: 17.712

4.  Behavioral plasticity allows short-term adjustment to a novel environment.

Authors:  Karin Gross; Gilberto Pasinelli; Hansjoerg P Kunc
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.926

5.  Seed-caching responses to substrate and rock cover by two Peromyscus species: implications for pinyon pine establishment.

Authors:  Kristen M Pearson; Tad C Theimer
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2004-07-16       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  Do rufous hummingbirds (Selasphorus rufus) use visual beacons?

Authors:  T Andrew Hurly; Simone Franz; Susan D Healy
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2009-09-20       Impact factor: 3.084

7.  Noise pollution changes avian communities and species interactions.

Authors:  Clinton D Francis; Catherine P Ortega; Alexander Cruz
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2009-07-23       Impact factor: 10.834

8.  Impacts of chronic anthropogenic noise from energy-sector activity on abundance of songbirds in the boreal forest.

Authors:  Erin M Bayne; Lucas Habib; Stan Boutin
Journal:  Conserv Biol       Date:  2008-06-20       Impact factor: 6.560

Review 9.  Birdsong and anthropogenic noise: implications and applications for conservation.

Authors:  Hans Slabbekoorn; Erwin A P Ripmeester
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2007-09-03       Impact factor: 6.185

10.  Noise pollution filters bird communities based on vocal frequency.

Authors:  Clinton D Francis; Catherine P Ortega; Alexander Cruz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  30 in total

1.  Anthropogenic noise's first reverberation into community ecology.

Authors:  Alvin Y Chan; Daniel T Blumstein
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-04-25       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  The importance of invertebrates when considering the impacts of anthropogenic noise.

Authors:  Erica L Morley; Gareth Jones; Andrew N Radford
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2013-12-11       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Habitat loss and modification due to gas development in the Fayetteville shale.

Authors:  Matthew D Moran; A Brandon Cox; Rachel L Wells; Chloe C Benichou; Maureen R McClung
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 3.266

Review 4.  Aquatic noise pollution: implications for individuals, populations, and ecosystems.

Authors:  Hansjoerg P Kunc; Kirsty Elizabeth McLaughlin; Rouven Schmidt
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Direct and indirect effects of noise pollution alter biological communities in and near noise-exposed environments.

Authors:  Masayuki Senzaki; Taku Kadoya; Clinton D Francis
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2020-03-18       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Chronic anthropogenic noise disrupts glucocorticoid signaling and has multiple effects on fitness in an avian community.

Authors:  Nathan J Kleist; Robert P Guralnick; Alexander Cruz; Christopher A Lowry; Clinton D Francis
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-01-08       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Frogs adapt to physiologically costly anthropogenic noise.

Authors:  Jennifer B Tennessen; Susan E Parks; Lindsey Swierk; Laura K Reinert; Whitney M Holden; Louise A Rollins-Smith; Koranda A Walsh; Tracy Langkilde
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2018-11-21       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  Light and noise pollution interact to disrupt interspecific interactions.

Authors:  Taegan A McMahon; Jason R Rohr; Ximena E Bernal
Journal:  Ecology       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 5.499

9.  Negative effects of light pollution on pollinator visits are outweighed by positive effects on the reproductive success of a bat-pollinated tree.

Authors:  Henry F Dzul-Cauich; Miguel A Munguía-Rosas
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2022-01-07

10.  Long-term noise pollution affects seedling recruitment and community composition, with negative effects persisting after removal.

Authors:  Jennifer N Phillips; Sarah E Termondt; Clinton D Francis
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2021-04-14       Impact factor: 5.349

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.