Effect of anthropogenic noise on call parameters of Hyla arborea (Anura: Hylidae)

Simeon Lukanov, Borislav Naumov

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/EQ.2019.006

Abstract


Increasing urbanisation in recent decades has subjected many species and their populations to the influence of anthropogenic noise generated by human technologies. Noise pollution can negatively affect acoustic communication in representatives of different taxa and frogs, as the most vocally active amphibians, are especially vulnerable to such adverse effects. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that anthropogenic noise could alter the mating call parameters in the European treefrog. The two chosen study sites were in the same geographic area and had similar characteristics except for the presence of anthropogenic noise source. Recordings were made in a WAV-PCM format and both spectral and temporal call parameters were analysed using specialised software. Results demonstrated significant differences in most of the studied parameters, suggesting that treefrogs are able to alter their calls and communicate successfully in moderate levels of anthropogenic noise.

Keywords


amplitude; European treefrog; frequency; mating call; noise pollution

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bee M., 2004, Sound Ruler acoustical analysis: a free, open code, multi-platform sound analysis and graphing package. Bioacoustics 14: 171-178.

Bee M., 2012, Sound source perception in anuran amphibians. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 22: 301–310.

Bee M. & Swanson E., 2007, Auditory masking of anuran advertisement calls by road traffic noise. Animal Behaviour 74: 1765-1776.

Borgula A., 1993, Causes of the decline in Hyla arborea, [in:] A.H.P. Stumpel, U. Tester (eds), 1st International Workshop on Hyla arborea. Institute for Forestry and Nature Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands: 71–80.

Brattstrom B. & Bondello M., 1983, Effects of off-road vehicle noise on desert vertebrates, [in:] R.H Webb & H.G. Wilshire (eds), Environmental Effects of Off-Road Vehicles. Springer-Verlag, New York: 167-204.

Brumm H. & Bee M., 2016, A meta-analytic castle built on sand? A comment on Roca et al. Behavioral Ecology 27(5): 1277–1278.

Cunnington G.M. & Fahrig L., 2010, Plasticity in the vocalizations of anurans in response to traffic noise. Acta Oecologica 36: 463–470.

Dufresnes C., Brelsford A., Crnobrnja-Isailovic J., Tzankov N., Lymberakis P. & Perrin N., 2015, Timeframe of speciation inferred from secondary contact zones in the European tree frog radiation (Hyla arborea group). BMC Evolutionary Biology 15: 155. (doi: 10.1186/s12862-015-0385-2).

Fahrig L., Pedlar J.H., Pope S.E., Taylor P.H., & Wegner J.F., 1995, Effect of road traffic on amphibian density. Biological Conservation 73: 177–182.

Gerhardt H.C., 1991, Female mate choice in treefrogs: static and dynamic acoustic criteria. Animal Behaviour 42(4): 615–635.

Goodwin S.E. & Shriver W.G., 2011, Effects of traffic noise on occupancy patterns of forest birds. Conservation Biology 25: 406–411.

Gridi-Papp M. (ed.), 2003–2007, SoundRuler: Acoustic analysis for research and teaching. (http://soundruler.sourceforge.net).

Hanna D.E., Wilson D.R., Blouin-Demers G. & Mennill D.J., 2014, Spring peepers Pseudacris crucifer modify their call structure in response to noise. Current Zoology 60: 438–448.

Jochimsen D., Peterson C., Andrews K. & Gibbons J., 2004, A literature review of the effects of roads on amphibians and reptiles and the measures used to minimize those effects. Idaho Fish and Game Department, USDA Forest Service.

Junqua J.C, Fincke S. & Field K., 1999, The Lombard effect: a reflex to better communicate with others in noise, Acoustics, speech, and signal processing, Proceedings, IEEE International Conference, 1999 Mar 15–19, Phoenix. Phoenix (AZ). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers 4: 2083–2086.

Kaiser K., Scofield D., Alloush M., Jones R., Marczak S., Martineau K., Oliva M. & Narins P., 2011, When sounds collide: the effect of anthropogenic noise on a breeding assemblage of frogs in Belize, Central America. Behaviour 148: 215-232.

Kight C.R. & Swaddle J.P., 2011, How and why environmental noise impacts animals: an integrative, mechanistic review. Ecology Letters 14(10): 1052-1061.

Kuczynski M.C., Vélez A., Schwartz J.J. & Bee M., 2010, Sound transmission and the recognition of temporally degraded sexual advertisement signals in Cope’s gray treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis). The Journal of Experimental Biology 213: 2840-2850.

Ladefoged P., 2001, A Course in phonetics, 4th Edition. Heinle & Heinle, Boston.

Lengagne, T., 2008, Traffic noise affects communication behaviour in a breeding anuran, Hyla arborea. Biological Conservation 141: 2023-2031.

Lengagne T., Aubin T., Lauga J. & Jouventin P., 1999, How do king penguins Aptenodytes patagonicus apply the Mathematical Theory of Information to communicate in windy conditions? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 266: 1623–1628.

Lukanov S., Simeonovska-Nikolova D. & Tzankov N., 2014, Effects of traffic noise on the locomotion activity and vocalization of the Marsh Frog, Pelophylax ridibundus. North-Western Journal of Zoology 10(2): 359-364.

Morton E.S., 1975, Ecological sources of selection on avian sounds. American Naturalist 109: 17–34.

Nash R.F., Gallup G.G. & McClure M.K., 1970, The immobility reaction in leopard frogs (Rana pipiens) as a function of noiseinduced fear. Psychonomic Science 21: 155-156.

Parris K.M., Velik-Lord M., North J.M. & Function L., 2009, Frogs call at a higher pitch in traffic noise. Ecology and Society 14: 25–46.

Pellet J., Hoehn S. & Perrin N., 2004, Multiscale determinants of tree frog (Hyla arborea L.) calling ponds in western Switzerland. Biodiversity and Conservation 13: 2227–2235

Roca I.T., Desrochers L., Giacomazzo M., Bertolo A., Bolduc P., Deschesnes R., Martin C.A, Rainville V., Rheault G. & Proulx R., 2016, Shifting song frequencies in response to anthropogenic noise: a meta-analysis on birds and anurans. Behavioral Ecology 27: 1269–1274.

Schneider H., 1999, Calls of the Levantine Frog, Rana bedriagae, at Birket Ata, Israel (Amphibia: Anura). Zoology in the Middle East 19: 101–116.

Schneider H. & Sinsch U., 1992, Mating call variation in lake frogs referred to as Rana ridibunda. Zeitschrift für Zoologische Systematik und Evolutionsforschung 30: 297–315.

Schneider H. & Sinsch U., 1999, Taxonomic reassessment of Middle Eastern water frogs: Bioacoustic variation among populations considered as Rana ridibunda, R. bedriagae or R. levantina. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research 37: 57–65.

Slabbekoorn H. & Peet M., 2003, Birds sing at higher pitch in urban noise. Nature 424: 267.

StatSoft, Inc., 2004, STATISTICA (data analysis software system), version 7.0. (www.statsoft.com).

Speybroeck J., Beukema W., Bok B. & Van Der Voort J., 2016, Field guide to the amphibians and reptiles of Britain and Europe. Bloomsbury Natural History, UK.

Summers P.D., Cunnington G.M. & Fahrig L., 2011, Are the negative effects of roads on breeding birds caused by traffic noise? Journal of Applied Ecology 48 :1527–1534.

Velez A., Linehan-Skillings B.J., Gu Y., Sun Y. & Bee M., 2013, Pulse-number discrimination by Cope’s gray treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis) in modulated and unmodulated noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 134(4): 3079–3089.

Wale M.A., Simpson S.D. & Radford A.N., 2013, Noise negatively affects foraging and antipredator behaviour in shore Crabs. Animal Behaviour 86: 111-118.

Wells K.D., 2007, The ecology & behavior of amphibians. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Zollinger S.A., Podos J., Nemeth E., Goller F. & Brumm H., 2012, On the relationship between, and measurement of, amplitude and frequency in birdsong. Animal Behaviour 84: E1–E9.




Partnerzy platformy czasopism