00256nas a2200085 4500008004100000245002000041210002000061100002200081856006700103 2019 eng d00aNoise pollution0 aNoise pollution1 aSlabbekoorn, Hans uhttps://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S096098221930863203171nas a2200289 4500008004100000245010300041210006900144260001600213490000600229520224200235653002502477653001502502653002702517653002002544653002102564653002102585653001002606653001402616653001702630653001802647653001602665100002102681700004202702700002202744700002102766856009402787 2019 eng d00aEvidence of the environmental impact of noise pollution on biodiversity: a systematic map protocol0 aEvidence of the environmental impact of noise pollution on biodi cJan-12-20190 v83 a

Background

For decades, biodiversity has suffered massive losses worldwide. Urbanization is one of the major drivers of extinction because it leads to the physical fragmentation and loss of natural habitats and it is associated with related effects, e.g. pollution and in particular noise pollution given that many man-made sounds are generated in cities (e.g. industrial and traffic noise, etc.). However, all human activities generate sounds, even far from any human habitation (e.g. motor boats on lakes, aircraft in the air, etc.). Ecological research now deals increasingly with the effects of noise pollution on biodiversity. Many studies have shown the impacts of anthropogenic noise and concluded that it is potentially a threat to life on Earth. The present work describes a protocol to systematically map evidence of the environmental impact of noise pollution on biodiversity. The resulting map will inform on the species most studied and on the demonstrated impacts. This will be useful for further primary research by identifying knowledge gaps and in view of further analysis, such as systematic reviews.

Methods

Searches will include peer-reviewed and grey literature published in English and French. Two online databases will be searched using English terms and search consistency will be assessed with a test list. No geographical restrictions will be applied. The subject population will include all species. Exposures will include all types of man-made sounds (industrial, traffic, etc.) in all types of environments (or media) (terrestrial, aerial, aquatic), including all contexts and sound origins (spontaneous or recorded sounds, in situ or laboratory studies, etc.). All relevant outcomes will be considered (space use, reproduction, communication, abundance, etc.). An open-access database will be produced with all relevant studies selected during the three screening stages. For each study, the database will contain metadata on key variables of interest (species, types of sound, outcomes, etc.). This database will be available in conjunction with a map report describing the mapping process and the evidence base with summary figures and tables of the study characteristics.

10aAnthropogenic sounds10aecosystems10aImpact of urbanization10aMan-made sounds10aMasking auditory10aNatural habitats10aNoise10aPollution10aSpecies loss10aTraffic noise10aurban noise1 aSordello, Romain1 aDe Lachapelle, Frédérique, Flamerie1 aLivoreil, Barbara1 aVanpeene, Sylvie uhttps://environmentalevidencejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13750-019-0146-601258nas a2200181 4500008004100000245002800041210002800069260001600097520077500113653002400888653001700912653002000929653002100949100002000970700002300990700002001013856004301033 2018 eng d00aEcology of fish hearing0 aEcology of fish hearing cMay-11-20193 a

Underwater sound is directional and can convey important information about the surrounding environment or the animal emitting the sound. Therefore, sound is a major sensory channel for fishes and plays a key role in many life‐history strategies. The effect of anthropogenic noise on aquatic life, which may be causing homogenisation or fragmentation of biologically important signals underwater is of growing concern. In this review we discuss the role sound plays in the ecology of fishes, basic anatomical and physiological adaptations for sound reception and production, the effects of anthropogenic noise and how fishes may be coping to changes in their environment, to put the ecology of fish hearing into the context of the modern underwater soundscape.

10aanthropogenic noise10afish hearing10asound detection10asound production1 aPutland, R., L.1 aMontgomery, J., C.1 aRadford, C., A. uhttp://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/jfb.1386702022nas a2200193 4500008004100000022001400041245012000055210006900175260001600244300001600260490000800276520139100284100001901675700001801694700002601712700002401738700001501762856005101777 2018 eng d a0001-496600aBottlenose dolphin ( Tursiops truncatus) vocal modifications in response to spectrally pink background noise0 aBottlenose dolphin iTursiops truncatusi vocal modifications in r cJan-09-2018 a1742 - 17420 v1443 a

The increase of oceanic shipping is a global predicament. The resulting proliferation of underwater noise levels is a serious concern for marine mammal welfare, as it has the potential to interfere with the communicative signals of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). The Lombard effect and other noise-induced vocal modifications may be employed to compensate for reduced signal-to-noise ratios. This study aimed to determine which vocal modifications dolphins use during experimentally controlled background noise conditions. Three dolphins (ages 30–52) participated in behavioral hearing tests using an adaptive up-down staircase, go/no-go procedure with 15 or 40 kHz tones. Tones decreased by 3 dB increments if a dolphin responded to the tone with a conditioned whistle, and increased by 3 dB if they did not. Dolphins performed this task during ambient noise (control) conditions, as well as three elevated bandpass noise (experimental) conditions: 0.6–5 kHz (115 dB re 1 μPa) and 0.6–10 kHz (115 and 125 dB re 1 μPa). The acoustic parameters of the dolphins’ response whistles and victory squeals, such as duration, frequency, amplitude, and response latency, were analyzed and compared between control and noise conditions. These data provide a complement to field studies of odontocete noise-induced vocal modifications in the wild.

1 aZapetis, Maria1 aMulsow, Jason1 aSchlundt, Carolyn, E.1 aFinneran, James, J.1 aLyn, Heidi uhttp://asa.scitation.org/doi/10.1121/1.506772401941nas a2200169 4500008004100000022001400041245010000055210006900155260001600224300001600240490000800256520138700264100002301651700002201674700002401696856005101720 2018 eng d a0001-496600aSpatio-temporal modelling of underwater noise related to an arctic exploration drilling program0 aSpatiotemporal modelling of underwater noise related to an arcti cJan-09-2018 a1733 - 17330 v1443 a

One concern related to oil and gas industry activities in the arctic is the potential impact of anthropogenic noise on marine mammals. To gain understanding of the temporal evolution of the acoustic noise footprint from such activities, and to quantify the geographic extent at which sound levels remain within regulatory thresholds for marine mammal injury and behavioral disturbance, this work presents a comprehensive monitoring and modeling study of anthropogenic noise resulting from an exploration drilling project in the northeastern Chukchi Sea, conducted from July to October, 2015. Measured acoustic source levels of multiple vessels and drilling equipment were used to generate time-dependent wide-area noise fields. Model validation was carried out by comparing simulated results with high-resolution acoustic data acquired at multiple stations in the area. The study shows that noise radiating from up to 19 supporting vessels is usually dominant, but noise from certain drilling-related activities occasionally rises above vessel noise within a radius of 8 km from drillsites. Modeled scenarios also show that by constraining vessel positions to within a few kilometers of the drilling location, simultaneous construction of two oil well top holes results in minor increment of the aggregate acoustic footprint’s extent relative to single-well drilling.

1 aQuijano, Jorge, E.1 aHannay, David, E.1 aAustin, Melanie, E. uhttp://asa.scitation.org/doi/10.1121/1.506768601966nas a2200193 4500008004100000022001400041245007100055210006900126260001600195520133000211653002101541653002401562653002401586653001901610653001901629100001801648700002001666856008601686 2018 eng d a1045-224900aAnthropogenic noise disrupts mate searching in Gryllus bimaculatus0 aAnthropogenic noise disrupts mate searching in Gryllus bimaculat cApr-10-20183 a

Many animals use acoustic communication as a means of sending important biological information, such as their location, to potential receivers. However, anthropogenic noise is known to affect the ability of some species to either produce or receive signals, which may influence their reproductive success. In this study, we investigate the effect of anthropogenic noise on the mate-searching behaviors of the field cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. To accomplish this, phonotaxis trials were conducted with female field crickets under different acoustic conditions, and their ability to detect and move towards conspecific male calls was assessed. The presence of traffic noise reduced the likelihood that the female would approach the male calls and also reduced the time that the female spent attending to the calling stimulus before making her decision. However, the presence of white noise did not reduce the likelihood of approaching the calling speaker, indicating that the average amplitude of anthropogenic noise is, alone, not important in this conflict, but frequency and fluctuations in the stimulus or other characteristics might be. This study supports the hypothesis that anthropogenic noise does indeed influence the detectability of acoustic mate location signals, thus disrupting mate searching behavior.

10aacoustic signals10aanthropogenic noise10aGryllus bimaculatus10amate searching10asexual signals1 aBent, Adam, M1 aIngs, Thomas, C uhttps://academic.oup.com/beheco/advance-article/doi/10.1093/beheco/ary126/5115667