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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Urban ecosystems 2016-03, Vol.19 (1), p.373-382 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 |