Literature DB >> 26118691

A synthesis of two decades of research documenting the effects of noise on wildlife.

Graeme Shannon1, Megan F McKenna2, Lisa M Angeloni3, Kevin R Crooks4, Kurt M Fristrup2, Emma Brown2, Katy A Warner4, Misty D Nelson4, Cecilia White4, Jessica Briggs4, Scott McFarland4, George Wittemyer4.   

Abstract

Global increases in environmental noise levels - arising from expansion of human populations, transportation networks, and resource extraction - have catalysed a recent surge of research into the effects of noise on wildlife. Synthesising a coherent understanding of the biological consequences of noise from this literature is challenging. Taxonomic groups vary in auditory capabilities. A wide range of noise sources and exposure levels occur, and many kinds of biological responses have been observed, ranging from individual behaviours to changes in ecological communities. Also, noise is one of several environmental effects generated by human activities, so researchers must contend with potentially confounding explanations for biological responses. Nonetheless, it is clear that noise presents diverse threats to species and ecosystems and salient patterns are emerging to help inform future natural resource-management decisions. We conducted a systematic and standardised review of the scientific literature published from 1990 to 2013 on the effects of anthropogenic noise on wildlife, including both terrestrial and aquatic studies. Research to date has concentrated predominantly on European and North American species that rely on vocal communication, with approximately two-thirds of the data set focussing on songbirds and marine mammals. The majority of studies documented effects from noise, including altered vocal behaviour to mitigate masking, reduced abundance in noisy habitats, changes in vigilance and foraging behaviour, and impacts on individual fitness and the structure of ecological communities. This literature survey shows that terrestrial wildlife responses begin at noise levels of approximately 40 dBA, and 20% of papers documented impacts below 50 dBA. Our analysis highlights the utility of existing scientific information concerning the effects of anthropogenic noise on wildlife for predicting potential outcomes of noise exposure and implementing meaningful mitigation measures. Future research directions that would support more comprehensive predictions regarding the magnitude and severity of noise impacts include: broadening taxonomic and geographical scope, exploring interacting stressors, conducting larger-scale studies, testing mitigation approaches, standardising reporting of acoustic metrics, and assessing the biological response to noise-source removal or mitigation. The broad volume of existing information concerning the effects of anthropogenic noise on wildlife offers a valuable resource to assist scientists, industry, and natural-resource managers in predicting potential outcomes of noise exposure.
© 2015 Cambridge Philosophical Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  acoustic metrics; acoustics; behaviour; conservation; fitness; human disturbance; masking; mitigation; noise pollution; physiology; vocal communication

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26118691     DOI: 10.1111/brv.12207

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc        ISSN: 0006-3231


  79 in total

1.  Noise affects resource assessment in an invertebrate.

Authors:  Erin P Walsh; Gareth Arnott; Hansjoerg P Kunc
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.703

2.  Energy Development in Colorado's Pawnee National Grasslands: Mapping and Measuring the Disturbance Footprint of Renewables and Non-Renewables.

Authors:  Chris W Baynard; Ksenya Mjachina; Robert D Richardson; Robert W Schupp; J David Lambert; Alexander A Chibilyev
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2017-04-03       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  Gestational Stress Augments Postpartum β-Amyloid Pathology and Cognitive Decline in a Mouse Model of Alzheimer's Disease.

Authors:  Zahra Jafari; Jogender Mehla; Bryan E Kolb; Majid H Mohajerani
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 5.357

4.  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

5.  Sensory pollutants alter bird phenology and fitness across a continent.

Authors:  Masayuki Senzaki; Clinton D Francis; Jesse R Barber; Jennifer N Phillips; Neil H Carter; Caren B Cooper; Mark A Ditmer; Kurt M Fristrup; Christopher J W McClure; Daniel J Mennitt; Luke P Tyrrell; Jelena Vukomanovic; Ashley A Wilson
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2020-11-11       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Developmental experience with anthropogenic noise hinders adult mate location in an acoustically signalling invertebrate.

Authors:  Gabrielle A Gurule-Small; Robin M Tinghitella
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.703

7.  A new large-scale index (AcED) for assessing traffic noise disturbance on wildlife: stress response in a roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) population.

Authors:  Carlos Iglesias-Merchan; Fernando Horcajada-Sánchez; Luis Diaz-Balteiro; Gema Escribano-Ávila; Carlos Lara-Romero; Emilio Virgós; Aimara Planillo; Isabel Barja
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 2.513

8.  Assessment of noise level and noise propagation generated by light-lift helicopters in mountain natural environments.

Authors:  Stefano Grigolato; Omar Mologni; Andrea Rosario Proto; Giuseppe Zimbalatti; Raffaele Cavalli
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2018-01-20       Impact factor: 2.513

9.  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

10.  Condition-dependent responses of fish to motorboats.

Authors:  H R Harding; T A C Gordon; K Wong; M I McCormick; S D Simpson; A N Radford
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2020-11-18       Impact factor: 3.703

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.