Background Acoustics in Terrestrial Ecology

Literature Cited

1. Barber JR, Crooks KR, Fristrup KM. 2010. The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25:180–89
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bradbury JW, Vehrencamp SL. 2011. Principles of Animal Communication Sunderland, MA: Sinauer. , 2nd ed..
3. Brumm H. 2004. The impact of environmental noise on song amplitude in a territorial bird. J. Anim. Ecol. 73:434–40
   [Google Scholar]
4. Brumm H, Goymann W, Derégnaucourt S, Geberzahn N, Zollinger SA. 2021. Traffic noise disrupts vocal development and suppresses immune function. Sci. Adv. 7:eabe2405
   [Google Scholar]
5. Brumm H, Naguib M. 2009. Environmental acoustics and the evolution of bird song. Adv. Study Behav. 40:1–33
   [Google Scholar]
6. Brumm H, Slabbekoorn H. 2005. Acoustic communication in noise. Adv. Study Behav. 35:151–209
   [Google Scholar]
7. Brumm H, Zollinger SA. 2011. The evolution of the Lombard effect: 100 years of psychoacoustic research. Behavior 148:1173–98
   [Google Scholar]
8. Brumm H, Zollinger SA, Niemelä PT, Sprau P. 2017. Measurement artifacts lead to false positives in the study of birdsong in noise. Methods Ecol. Evol. 8:1617–25
   [Google Scholar]
9. Bunkley JP, Barber JR. 2015. Noise reduces foraging efficiency in pallid bats (Antrozous pallidus). Ethology 121:1116–21
   [Google Scholar]
10. Bunkley JP, McClure CJW, Kawahara AY, Francis CD, Barber JR. 2017. Anthropogenic noise changes arthropod abundances. Ecol. Evol. 7:2977–85
    [Google Scholar]
11. Bunkley JP, McClure CJW, Kleist NJ, Francis CD, Barber JR. 2015. Anthropogenic noise alters bat activity levels and echolocation calls. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 3:62–71
    [Google Scholar]
12. Cardoso GC, Klingbeil BT, La Sorte FA, Lepczyk CA, Fink D, Flather CH 2020. Exposure to noise pollution across North American passerines supports the noise filter hypothesis. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 29:1430–34
    [Google Scholar]
13. Derryberry EP, Gentry K, Derryberry GE, Phillips JN, Danner RM et al. 2017. White-crowned sparrow males show immediate flexibility in song amplitude but not in song minimum frequency in response to changes in noise levels in the field. Ecol. Evol. 7:4991–5001
    [Google Scholar]
14. Derryberry EP, Phillips JN, Derryberry GE, Blum MJ, Luther D. 2020. Singing in a silent spring: Birds respond to a half-century soundscape reversion during the COVID-19 shutdown. Science 370:575–79
    [Google Scholar]
15. Dominoni DM, Halfwerk W, Baird E, Buxton RT, Fernández-Juricic E et al. 2020. Why conservation biology can benefit from sensory ecology. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4:502–11
    [Google Scholar]
16. Dooling RJ, Popper AN. 2007. The effects of highway noise on birds Rep. Jones & Stokes Assoc. Sacramento, CA: https://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/bio/files/caltrans_birds_10-7-2007b.pdf
17. Duarte CM, Chapuis L, Collin SP, Costa DP, Devassy RP et al. 2021. The soundscape of the Anthropocene ocean. Science 371:eaba4658
    [Google Scholar]
18. Duarte M, Kaizer M, Young R, Rodrigues M, Sousa-Lima R. 2018. Mining noise affects loud call structures and emission patterns of wild black-fronted titi monkeys. Primates 59:89–97
    [Google Scholar]
19. Estes JA, Terborgh J, Brashares JS, Power ME, Berger J et al. 2011. Trophic downgrading of planet Earth. Science 333:301–306
    [Google Scholar]
20. Fong DW, Kane TC, Culver DC. 1995. Vestigialization and loss of nonfunctional characters. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 26:249–68
    [Google Scholar]
21. Fontaine B, Köppl C, Peña JL. 2015. Reverse correlation analysis of auditory-nerve fiber responses to broadband noise in a bird, the barn owl. J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 16:101–19
    [Google Scholar]
22. Forsman JT, Martin TE. 2009. Habitat selection for parasite-free space by hosts of parasitic cowbirds. Oikos 118:464–70
    [Google Scholar]
23. Francis CD. 2015. Vocal traits and diet explain avian sensitivities to anthropogenic noise. Glob. Change Biol. 21:1809–20
    [Google Scholar]
24. Francis CD, Barber JR. 2013. A framework for understanding noise impacts on wildlife: an urgent conservation priority. Front. Ecol. Environ. 11:305–13
    [Google Scholar]
25. Francis CD, Kleist NJ, Ortega CP, Cruz A. 2012. Noise pollution alters ecological services: enhanced pollination and disrupted seed dispersal. Proc. R. Soc. B 279:2727–35
    [Google Scholar]
26. Francis CD, Ortega CP, Cruz A. 2009. Noise pollution changes avian communities and species interactions. Curr. Biol. 19:1415–19
    [Google Scholar]
27. Francis CD, Wilkins MR. 2021. Testing the strength and direction of selection on vocal frequency using metabolic scaling theory. Ecosphere 12:e23733
    [Google Scholar]
28. Fröhlich A, Ciach M. 2018. Noise pollution and decreased size of wooded areas reduces the probability of occurrence of tawny owl Strix aluco. Ibis 160:634–46
    [Google Scholar]
29. Fullard JH, Yack JE. 1993. The evolutionary biology of insect hearing. Trends Ecol. Evol. 8:248–52
    [Google Scholar]
30. Gall MD, Brierley LE, Lucas JR. 2012. The sender–receiver matching hypothesis: support from the peripheral coding of acoustic features in songbirds. J. Exp. Biol. 215:3742–51
    [Google Scholar]
31. Gall MD, Salameh TS, Lucas JR. 2013. Songbird frequency selectivity and temporal resolution vary with sex and season. Proc. R. Soc. B 280:20122296
    [Google Scholar]
32. Geipel I, Lattenkamp EZ, Dixon MM, Wiegrebe L, Page RA. 2021. Hearing sensitivity: an underlying mechanism for niche differentiation in gleaning bats. PNAS 118:e2024943118
    [Google Scholar]
33. Gentry KE, Derryberry EP, Danner RM, Danner JE, Luther DA. 2017. Immediate signaling flexibility in response to experimental noise in urban, but not rural, white-crowned sparrows. Ecosphere 8:e01916
    [Google Scholar]
34. Goense JB, Feng AS. 2005. Seasonal changes in frequency tuning and temporal processing in single neurons in the frog auditory midbrain. J. Neurobiol. 65:22–36
    [Google Scholar]
35. Gomes DG, Francis CD, Barber JR. 2021a. Using the past to understand the present: coping with natural and anthropogenic noise. BioScience 71:223–34
    [Google Scholar]
36. Gomes DG, Toth CA, Bateman CC, Francis CD, Kawahara AY, Barber JR. 2021b. Experimental river noise alters arthropod abundance. Oikos 130:2001–14
    [Google Scholar]
37. Gomes DG, Toth CA, Cole H, Francis CD, Barber JR. 2021c. Phantom rivers filter birds and bats by acoustic niche. Nat. Commun. 12:3029
    [Google Scholar]
38. Greeney HF, Meneses MR, Hamilton CE, Lichter-Marck E, Mannan RW et al. 2015. Trait-mediated trophic cascade creates enemy-free space for nesting hummingbirds. Sci. Adv. 1:e1500310
    [Google Scholar]
39. Gross K, Pasinelli G, Kunc HP. 2010. Behavioral plasticity allows short-term adjustment to a novel environment. Am. Nat. 176:456–64
    [Google Scholar]
40. Hage SR, Jiang T, Berquist SW, Feng J, Metzner W. 2013. Ambient noise induces independent shifts in call frequency and amplitude within the Lombard effect in echolocating bats. PNAS 110:4063–68
    [Google Scholar]
41. Halfwerk W, Bot S, Buikx J, van der Velde M, Komdeur J et al. 2011a. Low-frequency songs lose their potency in noisy urban conditions. PNAS 108:14549–54
    [Google Scholar]
42. Halfwerk W, Holleman LJM, Lessells CM, Slabbekoorn H. 2011b. Negative impact of traffic noise on avian reproductive success. J. Appl. Ecol. 48:210–19
    [Google Scholar]
43. Heffner HE, Heffner RS. 2018. The evolution of mammalian hearing. AIP Conf. Proc 1965:130001
    [Google Scholar]
44. Henry KS, Gall MD, Bidelman GM, Lucas JR. 2011. Songbirds tradeoff auditory frequency resolution and temporal resolution. J. Comp. Physiol. A 197:351–59
    [Google Scholar]
45. Henry KS, Gall MD, Vélez A, Lucas JR 2016. Avian auditory processing at four different scales: variation among species, seasons, sexes, and individuals. Psychological Mechanisms in Animal Communication MA Bee, CT Miller 17–55. Berlin: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
46. Henry KS, Lucas JR. 2010. Auditory sensitivity and the frequency selectivity of auditory filters in the Carolina chickadee, Poecile carolinensis. Anim. Behav. 80:497–507
    [Google Scholar]
47. Hu Y, Cardoso GC. 2009. Are bird species that vocalize at higher frequencies preadapted to inhabit noisy urban areas?. Behav. Ecol. 20:1268–73
    [Google Scholar]
48. Huet des Aunay G, Grenna M, Slabbekoorn H, Nicolas P, Nagle L et al. 2017. Negative impact of urban noise on sexual receptivity and clutch size in female domestic canaries. Ethology 123:843–53
    [Google Scholar]
49. Huet des Aunay G, Slabbekoorn H, Nagle L, Passas F, Nicolas P, Draganoiu TI. 2014. Urban noise undermines female sexual preferences for low-frequency songs in domestic canaries. Anim. Behav. 87:67–75
    [Google Scholar]
50. Hutchinson GE. 1957. Concluding remarks. Proceedings of the 22nd Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology415–27. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Lab. Press
    [Google Scholar]
51. Injaian AS, Gonzalez-Gomez PL, Taff CC, Bird AK, Ziur AD et al. 2019. Traffic noise exposure alters nestling physiology and telomere attrition through direct, but not maternal, effects in a free-living bird. Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 276:14–21
    [Google Scholar]
52. Jetz W, Thomas GH, Joy JB, Hartmann K, Mooers AO. 2012. The global diversity of birds in space and time. Nature 491:444–48
    [Google Scholar]
53. Kawahara AY, Plotkin D, Espeland M, Meusemann K, Toussaint EF et al. 2019. Phylogenomics reveals the evolutionary timing and pattern of butterflies and moths. PNAS 116:22657–63
    [Google Scholar]
54. Kight CR, Saha MS, Swaddle JP. 2012. Anthropogenic noise is associated with reductions in the productivity of breeding eastern bluebirds (Sialia sialis). Ecol. Appl. 22:1989–96
    [Google Scholar]
55. Kight CR, Swaddle JP. 2011. How and why environmental noise impacts animals: an integrative, mechanistic review. Ecol. Lett. 14:1052–61
    [Google Scholar]
56. Kight CR, Swaddle JP. 2015. Eastern bluebirds alter their song in response to anthropogenic changes in the acoustic environment. Integr. Comp. Biol. 55:418–31
    [Google Scholar]
57. Kleist NJ, Guralnick RP, Cruz A, Francis CD. 2017. Sound settlement: Noise surpasses land cover in explaining breeding habitat selection of secondary cavity-nesting birds. Ecol. Appl. 27:260–73
    [Google Scholar]
58. Kleist NJ, Guralnick RP, Cruz A, Lowry CA, Francis CD. 2018. Chronic anthropogenic noise disrupts glucocorticoid signaling and has multiple effects on fitness in an avian community. PNAS 115:E648–57
    [Google Scholar]
59. Krumm B, Klump G, Köppl C, Langemann U. 2017. Barn owls have ageless ears. Proc. R. Soc. B 284:20171584
    [Google Scholar]
60. Lampe U, Reinhold K, Schmoll T 2014. How grasshoppers respond to road noise: developmental plasticity and population differentiation in acoustic signalling. Funct. Ecol. 28:660–68
    [Google Scholar]
61. Le M-LT, Garvin CM, Barber JR, Francis CD. 2019. Natural sounds alter California ground squirrel, Otospermophilus beecheyi, foraging, vigilance and movement behaviors. Anim. Behav. 157:51–60
    [Google Scholar]
62. Lee N, Vélez A, Bee M. 2023. Behind the mask(ing): how frogs cope with noise. J. Comp. Physiol. A 209:47–66
    [Google Scholar]
63. Lipshutz SE, Overcast IA, Hickerson MJ, Brumfield RT, Derryberry EP. 2017. Behavioural response to song and genetic divergence in two subspecies of white-crowned sparrows (Zonotrichia leucophrys). Mol. Ecol. 26:3011–27
    [Google Scholar]
64. Liu Y, Zollinger SA, Brumm H. 2021. Chronic exposure to urban noise during the vocal learning period does not lead to increased song frequencies in zebra finches. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 75:3
    [Google Scholar]
65. Lohr B, Wright TF, Dooling RJ. 2003. Detection and discrimination of natural calls in masking noise by birds: estimating the active space of a signal. Anim. Behav. 65:763–77
    [Google Scholar]
66. Lucas JR, Freeberg TM, Long GR, Krishnan A. 2007. Seasonal variation in avian auditory evoked responses to tones: a comparative analysis of Carolina chickadees, tufted titmice, and white-breasted nuthatches. J. Comp. Physiol. A 193:201–15
    [Google Scholar]
67. Luther DA, Baptista L. 2010. Urban noise and the cultural evolution of bird songs. Proc. R. Soc. B 277:469–73
    [Google Scholar]
68. Luther DA, Derryberry EP. 2012. Birdsongs keep pace with city life: Changes in song over time in an urban songbird affects communication. Anim. Behav. 83:1059–66
    [Google Scholar]
69. Luther DA, Phillips J, Derryberry EP. 2016. Not so sexy in the city: Urban birds adjust songs to noise but compromise vocal performance. Behav. Ecol. 27:332–40
    [Google Scholar]
70. Lyman CP, Chatfield PO. 1955. Physiology of hibernation in mammals. Physiol. Rev. 35:403–25
    [Google Scholar]
71. Mason JT, McClure CJW, Barber JR. 2016. Anthropogenic noise impairs owl hunting behavior. Biol. Conserv. 199:29–32
    [Google Scholar]
72. McMahon TA, Rohr JR, Bernal XE. 2017. Light and noise pollution interact to disrupt interspecific interactions. Ecology 98:1290–99
    [Google Scholar]
73. Mikula P, Valcu M, Brumm H, Bulla M, Forstmeier W et al. 2021. A global analysis of song frequency in passerines provides no support for the acoustic adaptation hypothesis but suggests a role for sexual selection. Ecol. Lett. 24:477–86
    [Google Scholar]
74. Moore BC. 2012. An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing Leiden, Neth: Brill
75. Morris-Drake A, Bracken AM, Kern JM, Radford AN. 2017. Anthropogenic noise alters dwarf mongoose responses to heterospecific alarm calls. Environ. Pollut. 223:476–83
    [Google Scholar]
76. Morton ES. 1975. Ecological sources of selection on avian sounds. Am. Nat. 109:17–34
    [Google Scholar]
77. Moseley DL, Derryberry GE, Phillips JN, Danner JE, Danner RM et al. 2018. Acoustic adaptation to city noise through vocal learning by a songbird. Proc. R. Soc. B 285:20181356
    [Google Scholar]
78. Nemeth E, Brumm H. 2010. Birds and anthropogenic noise: Are urban songs adaptive?. Am. Nat. 176:465–75
    [Google Scholar]
79. Nenninger HR, Koper N. 2018. Effects of conventional oil wells on grassland songbird abundance are caused by presence of infrastructure, not noise. Biol. Conserv. 218:124–33
    [Google Scholar]
80. Orci KM, Petróczki K, Barta Z. 2016. Instantaneous song modification in response to fluctuating traffic noise in the tree cricket Oecanthus pellucens. Anim. Behav. 112:187–94
    [Google Scholar]
81. Page RA, ter Hofstede HM. 2021. Sensory and cognitive ecology of bats. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 52:541–62
    [Google Scholar]
82. Patricelli GL, Blickley JL. 2006. Avian communication in urban noise: causes and consequences of vocal adjustment. Auk 123:639–49
    [Google Scholar]
83. Phillips JN, Derryberry EP. 2018. Urban sparrows respond to a sexually selected trait with increased aggression in noise. Sci. Rep. 8:7505
    [Google Scholar]
84. Phillips JN, Ruef SK, Garvin CM, Le M-LT, Francis CD. 2019. Background noise disrupts host–parasitoid interactions. R. Soc. Open Sci. 6:190867
    [Google Scholar]
85. Phillips JN, Termondt SE, Francis CD. 2021. Long-term noise pollution affects seedling recruitment and community composition, with negative effects persisting after removal. Proc. R. Soc. B 288:20202906
    [Google Scholar]
86. Popper AN, Platt C, Edds PL 1992. Evolution of the vertebrate inner ear: an overview of ideas. The Evolutionary Biology of Hearing DB Webster, AN Popper, RR Fay 49–57. Berlin: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
87. Rabat A. 2007. Extra-auditory effects of noise in laboratory animals: the relationship between noise and sleep. J. Am. Assoc. Lab. Anim. Sci. 46:35–41
    [Google Scholar]
88. Raynor EJ, Whalen CE, Brown MB, Powell LA. 2017. Grassland bird community and acoustic complexity appear unaffected by proximity to a wind energy facility in the Nebraska Sandhills. Condor Ornithol. Appl. 119:484–96
    [Google Scholar]
89. Reichard DG, Atwell JW, Pandit MM, Cardoso GC, Price TD, Ketterson ED. 2020. Urban birdsongs: Higher minimum song frequency of an urban colonist persists in a common garden experiment. Anim. Behav. 170:33–41
    [Google Scholar]
90. Ríos-Chelén AA, Quirós-Guerrero E, Gil D, Macías Garcia C. 2013. Dealing with urban noise: Vermilion flycatchers sing longer songs in noisier territories. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 67:145–52
    [Google Scholar]
91. Roca IT, Desrochers L, Giacomazzo M, Bertolo A, Bolduc P et al. 2016. Shifting song frequencies in response to anthropogenic noise: a meta-analysis on birds and anurans. Behav. Ecol. 27:1269–74
    [Google Scholar]
92. Römer H, Holderied M. 2020. Decision making in the face of a deadly predator: High-amplitude behavioral thresholds can be adaptive for rainforest crickets under high background noise levels. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 375:20190471
    [Google Scholar]
93. Ryan MJ, Brenowitz EA. 1985. The role of body size, phylogeny, and ambient noise in the evolution of bird song. Am. Nat. 126:87–100
    [Google Scholar]
94. Scharf B. 1970. Critical bands. Foundations of Modern Auditory Theory JV Tobias , Vol. 1159–202. New York: Academic
    [Google Scholar]
95. Senzaki M, Barber JR, Phillips JN, Carter NH, Cooper CB et al. 2020a. Sensory pollutants alter bird phenology and fitness across a continent. Nature 587:605–9
    [Google Scholar]
96. Senzaki M, Kadoya T, Francis CD. 2020b. Direct and indirect effects of noise pollution alter biological communities in and near noise-exposed environments. Proc. R. Soc. B 287:20200176
    [Google Scholar]
97. Senzaki M, Yamaura Y, Francis CD, Nakamura F. 2016. Traffic noise reduces foraging efficiency in wild owls. Sci. Rep. 6:30602
    [Google Scholar]
98. Shannon G, Angeloni LM, Wittemyer G, Fristrup KM, Crooks KR. 2014. Road traffic noise modifies behavior of a keystone species. Anim. Behav. 94:135–41
    [Google Scholar]
99. Shannon G, McKenna MF, Angeloni LM, Crooks KR, Fristrup KM et al. 2016. A synthesis of two decades of research documenting the effects of noise on wildlife. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 91:982–1005
    [Google Scholar]
100. Shonfield J, Bayne E. 2017. The effect of industrial noise on owl occupancy in the boreal forest at multiple spatial scales. Avian Conserv. Ecol. 12:13
     [Google Scholar]
101. Siemers BM, Schaub A. 2011. Hunting at the highway: Traffic noise reduces foraging efficiency in acoustic predators. Proc. R. Soc. B 278:1646–52
     [Google Scholar]
102. Slabbekoorn H. 2013. Songs of the city: noise-dependent spectral plasticity in the acoustic phenotype of urban birds. Anim. Behav. 85:1089–99
     [Google Scholar]
103. Slabbekoorn H, Peet M. 2003. Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise. Nature 424:267
     [Google Scholar]
104. Song H, Béthoux O, Shin S, Donath A, Letsch H et al. 2020. Phylogenomic analysis sheds light on the evolutionary pathways towards acoustic communication in Orthoptera. Nat. Commun. 11:4939
     [Google Scholar]
105. Summers PD, Cunnington GM, Fahrig L. 2011. Are the negative effects of roads on breeding birds caused by traffic noise?. J. Appl. Ecol. 48:1527–34
     [Google Scholar]
106. Swaddle JP, Francis CD, Barber JR, Cooper CB, Kyba CM et al. 2015. A framework to assess evolutionary responses to anthropogenic light and sound. Trends Ecol. Evol. 30:550–60
     [Google Scholar]
107. Sweet K, Sweet B, Gomes D, Francis C, Barber J. 2022. Natural and anthropogenic noise increase vigilance and decrease foraging behaviors in song sparrows. Behav. Ecol. 33:288–97
     [Google Scholar]
108. ter Hofstede HM, Ratcliffe JM. 2016. Evolutionary escalation: the bat–moth arms race. J. Exp. Biol. 219:1589–602
     [Google Scholar]
109. Vargas-Salinas F, Amézquita A. 2014. Abiotic noise, call frequency and stream-breeding anuran assemblages. Evol. Ecol. 28:341–59
     [Google Scholar]
110. Vélez A, Gall MD, Fu J, Lucas JR. 2015. Song structure, not high-frequency song content, determines high-frequency auditory sensitivity in nine species of New World sparrows (Passeriformes: Emberizidae). Funct. Ecol. 29:487–97
     [Google Scholar]
111. Virgo J, Ruppert A, Lampert KP, Grafe TU, Eltz T. 2019. The sound of a blood meal: acoustic ecology of frog-biting midges (Corethrella) in lowland Pacific Costa Rica. Ethology 125:465–75
     [Google Scholar]
112. Ware HE, McClure CJW, Carlisle JD, Barber JR. 2015. A phantom road experiment reveals traffic noise is an invisible source of habitat degradation. PNAS 112:12105–9
     [Google Scholar]
113. Weir JT, Wheatcroft DJ, Price TD. 2012. The role of ecological constraint in driving the evolution of avian song frequency across a latitudinal gradient. Evolution 66:2773–83
     [Google Scholar]
114. Wilson AA, Ditmer MA, Barber JR, Carter NH, Miller ET et al. 2021. Artificial night light and anthropogenic noise interact to influence bird abundance over a continental scale. Glob. Change Biol. 27:3987–4004
     [Google Scholar]
115. Yager DD, Svenson GJ. 2008. Patterns of praying mantis auditory system evolution based on morphological, molecular, neurophysiological, and behavioral data. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 94:541–68
     [Google Scholar]
116. Zhao L, Wang J, Yang Y, Zhu B, Brauth SE, Tang Y, Cui J. 2017. An exception to the matched filter hypothesis: a mismatch of male call frequency and female best hearing frequency in a torrent frog. Ecol. Evol. 7:419–28
     [Google Scholar]
117. Zollinger SA, Goller F, Brumm H. 2011. Metabolic and respiratory costs of increasing song amplitude in zebra finches. PLOS ONE 6:e23198
     [Google Scholar]
118. Zollinger SA, Slater PJ, Nemeth E, Brumm H. 2017. Higher songs of city birds may not be an individual response to noise. Proc. R. Soc. B 284:20170602
     [Google Scholar]