Anthropogenic Noise and its Effect on Animal Communication: An Interface Between Comparative Psychology and Conservation Biology

By L. A. Rabin, Brenda McCowan, Stacie L. Hooper, Donald H. Owings. International Journal of Comparative Psychology, 2003

127 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Conservation biology and comparative psychology rarely intersect, in part because conservation biology typically emphasizes populations whereas comparative psychology concentrates on individual organisms. However, both fields could benefit from their integration. Conservation biology can profit from an enhanced understanding of individual-level impacts of habitat alteration and the resulting implications for conservation mitigation strategies. Comparative psychology can gain from increased attention to the mechanisms of adjustment used by organisms to “in vivo experiments” created by anthropogenic change. In this paper, we describe a conceptual framework useful for applying our understanding of animal communication to conservation biology. We then review studies of animal communication with conservation implications, and report our own preliminary work that demonstrates our framework in action.

Subfields: Developmental Biology, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3c832200d6dcb343582f952022e534398163815c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental Biology

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Social Psychology

S. Partan

Citations in the corpus

Plasticity in the vocalizations of anurans in response to traffic noise (2010, background): “…should increase the frequency of their vocalizations such that they are not masked by lower frequency noise (e.g. Slabbekoorn and Peet, 2003; Rabin et al., 2003) or that individuals should alter the temporal characteristics of their calls (Lengagne et al., 1999) such that they are not…”
Multimodal alarm behavior in urban and rural gray squirrels studied by means of observation and a mechanical robot (2010, background): “California ground squirrels shift the emphasis of their calls from lower to higher harmonics to avoid traffic noise (Rabin et al., 2003); great tits increase the pitch of their songs in noisy urban environments (Slabbekoorn and Peet, 2003); orca increase the duration of calls once boat traffic excee”
AVIAN COMMUNICATION IN URBAN NOISE: CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF VOCAL ADJUSTMENT (2006, background): “If vocal adjustment yields a net benefi t to individuals, then species that have this capacity may adapt more readily to human development (Rabin and Greene 2002, Rabin et al. 2003, Slabbekoorn and Peet 2003, Warren et al. 2006).”
High levels of environmental noise erode pair preferences in zebra finches: implications for noise pollution (2007, background): “…modulation and evolutionary adaptation of songs and calls in adult and nestling passerines (Klump 1996; Cynx et al. 1998; Pytte et al. 2003; Rabin et al. 2003; Slabbekoorn & Peet 2003; Aubin 2004; Brumm 2004; Brumm & Slabbekoorn 2004; FernándezJuricic et al. 2005; Leonard & Horn 2005;…”
SONG SPARROW (MELOSPIZA MELODIA) SONG VARIES WITH URBAN NOISE (2006, background): “Average frequency, high frequency, and frequency at maximum amplitude, however, were all of higher frequency at noisy sites (Rabin et al. 2003).”
Sources of background noise and their influence on vertebrate acoustic communication (2013, background): “, 2012; Luther & Derryberry, 2012), some mammals (Rabin et al., 2003), insects, such as the cicada, Cryptotympana takasagona (Shieh et al.”