Common urban birds continue to perceive predator calls that are overlapped by road noise

Recent studies suggest that songbird communication is negatively affected by anthropogenic noise. However, much of the current literature focuses on inter- and intra-sexual communication. Songbirds also use acoustic cues for many other functional behaviors. One example associated with fitness conseq...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Urban ecosystems 2016-03, Vol.19 (1), p.373-382
Hauptverfasser: Pettinga, D, Kennedy, J, Proppe, D. S
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 382
container_issue 1
container_start_page 373
container_title Urban ecosystems
container_volume 19
creator Pettinga, D
Kennedy, J
Proppe, D. S
description Recent studies suggest that songbird communication is negatively affected by anthropogenic noise. However, much of the current literature focuses on inter- and intra-sexual communication. Songbirds also use acoustic cues for many other functional behaviors. One example associated with fitness consequences is the identification of predatory threats through acoustic cues. To test the effect of anthropogenic noise on detection of acoustic cues, we compared the rates of seven anti-predator behavioral responses in urban dwelling songbirds foraging at bird feeders when exposed to playback of calls from predatory Cooper’s hawks under quiet conditions, and when overlapped with road noise. Only a single behavior, freeze response, decreased significantly when calls were overlapped with noise. However, freeze responses occurred in only a small percentage of playback trials, raising some question regarding the biological relevance of this observed difference. Overall, our results suggest that common urban songbirds are relatively successful at perceiving acoustic signals associated with predator presence. Whether this ability is commonplace amongst songbird species is unknown and warrants additional study. However, if this trait is not widespread, it may be an additional characteristic determining which bird species can inhabit noisy areas.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s11252-015-0498-9
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1780527198</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3986827841</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-2622c86057ec0e0484860b52b55d5b1350e2009fc28a8916fe4e5e11097cd3ab3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctKxTAQhosoeH0AVwbcuKnOJE2TLuXgDQQXKrgLaTrVSk9Tk1bw7c2hLsSFq5mB7xuGf7LsGOEcAdRFROSS54Ayh6LSebWV7aFUIsey4NupBy1yjVLuZvsxvgMkS-u97GXl12s_sDnUdmB1F5rInB-mbpiJTZ6NFBx1n8TGQI2dfGDO9n1k05udmA3E_CeF3o4jNaz-YsHbhg2-i3SY7bS2j3T0Uw-y5-urp9Vtfv9wc7e6vM-dUGLKecm50yVIRQ4ICl2koZa8lrKRNQoJxAGq1nFtdYVlSwVJQoRKuUbYWhxkZ8veMfiPmeJk1l101Pd2ID9Hg0qD5AorndDTP-i7n8OQrkuUEkpWQheJwoVywccYqDVj6NY2fBkEs8naLFmblLXZZG2q5PDFiYkdXin82vyPdLJIrfXGvoYumudHDlim53ChoRTfOaKJYQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1773759384</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Common urban birds continue to perceive predator calls that are overlapped by road noise</title><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Pettinga, D ; Kennedy, J ; Proppe, D. S</creator><creatorcontrib>Pettinga, D ; Kennedy, J ; Proppe, D. S</creatorcontrib><description>Recent studies suggest that songbird communication is negatively affected by anthropogenic noise. However, much of the current literature focuses on inter- and intra-sexual communication. Songbirds also use acoustic cues for many other functional behaviors. One example associated with fitness consequences is the identification of predatory threats through acoustic cues. To test the effect of anthropogenic noise on detection of acoustic cues, we compared the rates of seven anti-predator behavioral responses in urban dwelling songbirds foraging at bird feeders when exposed to playback of calls from predatory Cooper’s hawks under quiet conditions, and when overlapped with road noise. Only a single behavior, freeze response, decreased significantly when calls were overlapped with noise. However, freeze responses occurred in only a small percentage of playback trials, raising some question regarding the biological relevance of this observed difference. Overall, our results suggest that common urban songbirds are relatively successful at perceiving acoustic signals associated with predator presence. Whether this ability is commonplace amongst songbird species is unknown and warrants additional study. However, if this trait is not widespread, it may be an additional characteristic determining which bird species can inhabit noisy areas.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1083-8155</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-1642</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11252-015-0498-9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Acoustics ; Animal communication ; anthropogenic activities ; Anthropogenic factors ; Aves ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Birds ; Communication ; Ecology ; ecosystems ; Environmental Management ; foraging ; Foraging behavior ; hawks ; Life Sciences ; Nature Conservation ; Noise ; Roads &amp; highways ; Songbirds ; Studies ; Urban areas ; Urban Ecology</subject><ispartof>Urban ecosystems, 2016-03, Vol.19 (1), p.373-382</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-2622c86057ec0e0484860b52b55d5b1350e2009fc28a8916fe4e5e11097cd3ab3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-2622c86057ec0e0484860b52b55d5b1350e2009fc28a8916fe4e5e11097cd3ab3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11252-015-0498-9$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11252-015-0498-9$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pettinga, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kennedy, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Proppe, D. S</creatorcontrib><title>Common urban birds continue to perceive predator calls that are overlapped by road noise</title><title>Urban ecosystems</title><addtitle>Urban Ecosyst</addtitle><description>Recent studies suggest that songbird communication is negatively affected by anthropogenic noise. However, much of the current literature focuses on inter- and intra-sexual communication. Songbirds also use acoustic cues for many other functional behaviors. One example associated with fitness consequences is the identification of predatory threats through acoustic cues. To test the effect of anthropogenic noise on detection of acoustic cues, we compared the rates of seven anti-predator behavioral responses in urban dwelling songbirds foraging at bird feeders when exposed to playback of calls from predatory Cooper’s hawks under quiet conditions, and when overlapped with road noise. Only a single behavior, freeze response, decreased significantly when calls were overlapped with noise. However, freeze responses occurred in only a small percentage of playback trials, raising some question regarding the biological relevance of this observed difference. Overall, our results suggest that common urban songbirds are relatively successful at perceiving acoustic signals associated with predator presence. Whether this ability is commonplace amongst songbird species is unknown and warrants additional study. However, if this trait is not widespread, it may be an additional characteristic determining which bird species can inhabit noisy areas.</description><subject>Acoustics</subject><subject>Animal communication</subject><subject>anthropogenic activities</subject><subject>Anthropogenic factors</subject><subject>Aves</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Birds</subject><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>ecosystems</subject><subject>Environmental Management</subject><subject>foraging</subject><subject>Foraging behavior</subject><subject>hawks</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Nature Conservation</subject><subject>Noise</subject><subject>Roads &amp; highways</subject><subject>Songbirds</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Urban areas</subject><subject>Urban Ecology</subject><issn>1083-8155</issn><issn>1573-1642</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kctKxTAQhosoeH0AVwbcuKnOJE2TLuXgDQQXKrgLaTrVSk9Tk1bw7c2hLsSFq5mB7xuGf7LsGOEcAdRFROSS54Ayh6LSebWV7aFUIsey4NupBy1yjVLuZvsxvgMkS-u97GXl12s_sDnUdmB1F5rInB-mbpiJTZ6NFBx1n8TGQI2dfGDO9n1k05udmA3E_CeF3o4jNaz-YsHbhg2-i3SY7bS2j3T0Uw-y5-urp9Vtfv9wc7e6vM-dUGLKecm50yVIRQ4ICl2koZa8lrKRNQoJxAGq1nFtdYVlSwVJQoRKuUbYWhxkZ8veMfiPmeJk1l101Pd2ID9Hg0qD5AorndDTP-i7n8OQrkuUEkpWQheJwoVywccYqDVj6NY2fBkEs8naLFmblLXZZG2q5PDFiYkdXin82vyPdLJIrfXGvoYumudHDlim53ChoRTfOaKJYQ</recordid><startdate>20160301</startdate><enddate>20160301</enddate><creator>Pettinga, D</creator><creator>Kennedy, J</creator><creator>Proppe, D. S</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160301</creationdate><title>Common urban birds continue to perceive predator calls that are overlapped by road noise</title><author>Pettinga, D ; Kennedy, J ; Proppe, D. S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-2622c86057ec0e0484860b52b55d5b1350e2009fc28a8916fe4e5e11097cd3ab3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Acoustics</topic><topic>Animal communication</topic><topic>anthropogenic activities</topic><topic>Anthropogenic factors</topic><topic>Aves</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Birds</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>ecosystems</topic><topic>Environmental Management</topic><topic>foraging</topic><topic>Foraging behavior</topic><topic>hawks</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Nature Conservation</topic><topic>Noise</topic><topic>Roads &amp; highways</topic><topic>Songbirds</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Urban areas</topic><topic>Urban Ecology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pettinga, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kennedy, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Proppe, D. S</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Urban ecosystems</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pettinga, D</au><au>Kennedy, J</au><au>Proppe, D. S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Common urban birds continue to perceive predator calls that are overlapped by road noise</atitle><jtitle>Urban ecosystems</jtitle><stitle>Urban Ecosyst</stitle><date>2016-03-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>373</spage><epage>382</epage><pages>373-382</pages><issn>1083-8155</issn><eissn>1573-1642</eissn><abstract>Recent studies suggest that songbird communication is negatively affected by anthropogenic noise. However, much of the current literature focuses on inter- and intra-sexual communication. Songbirds also use acoustic cues for many other functional behaviors. One example associated with fitness consequences is the identification of predatory threats through acoustic cues. To test the effect of anthropogenic noise on detection of acoustic cues, we compared the rates of seven anti-predator behavioral responses in urban dwelling songbirds foraging at bird feeders when exposed to playback of calls from predatory Cooper’s hawks under quiet conditions, and when overlapped with road noise. Only a single behavior, freeze response, decreased significantly when calls were overlapped with noise. However, freeze responses occurred in only a small percentage of playback trials, raising some question regarding the biological relevance of this observed difference. Overall, our results suggest that common urban songbirds are relatively successful at perceiving acoustic signals associated with predator presence. Whether this ability is commonplace amongst songbird species is unknown and warrants additional study. However, if this trait is not widespread, it may be an additional characteristic determining which bird species can inhabit noisy areas.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><doi>10.1007/s11252-015-0498-9</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1083-8155
ispartof Urban ecosystems, 2016-03, Vol.19 (1), p.373-382
issn 1083-8155
1573-1642
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1780527198
source SpringerLink Journals
subjects Acoustics
Animal communication
anthropogenic activities
Anthropogenic factors
Aves
Biomedical and Life Sciences
Birds
Communication
Ecology
ecosystems
Environmental Management
foraging
Foraging behavior
hawks
Life Sciences
Nature Conservation
Noise
Roads & highways
Songbirds
Studies
Urban areas
Urban Ecology
title Common urban birds continue to perceive predator calls that are overlapped by road noise
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-11T14%3A56%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Common%20urban%20birds%20continue%20to%20perceive%20predator%20calls%20that%20are%20overlapped%20by%20road%20noise&rft.jtitle=Urban%20ecosystems&rft.au=Pettinga,%20D&rft.date=2016-03-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=373&rft.epage=382&rft.pages=373-382&rft.issn=1083-8155&rft.eissn=1573-1642&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11252-015-0498-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3986827841%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1773759384&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true