The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms.

By J. Barber, K. Crooks, Kurt Fristrup. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2010

999 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental Biology, Ecology, Speech and Hearing

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c0b7d9cc727bbcb2d115128aee1251e313160cfa

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

1. A. Radford
2. David A. Luther
3. Stephen D. Simpson
4. Kurt Fristrup
5. J. Barber
6. M. Wale
7. A. Parra
8. Peter P. Marra

In Ecology

1. A. Radford
2. A. Zedrosser
3. Andrew Sih
4. Jon E. Swenson
5. E. Staaterman
6. David A. Luther
7. Stephen D. Simpson
8. G. Seress

In Speech and Hearing

1. A. Radford
2. Stephen D. Simpson

Citations in the corpus

• The remote environmental assessment laboratory's acoustic library: An archive for studying soundscape ecology (2012, background): “In some cases, the characteristic soundscape has even disappeared from the system after modification (Warren et al., 2006; Joo, 2008; Barber et al., 2009).”
• A synthesis of two decades of research documenting the effects of noise on wildlife (2016, background): “Review papers have either focussed broadly on wildlife (Brumm & Slabbekoorn, 2005; Barber et al., 2010; Kight & Swaddle, 2011), or targeted specific taxonomic groups such as birds (Patricelli & Blickley, 2006; Slabbekoorn & Ripmeester, 2008; Ortega, 2012; Slabbekoorn, 2013), fish (Slabbekoorn et al.”
• Context-dependent impacts of anthropogenic noise on individual and social behaviour in a cooperatively breeding fish (2013, background): “There is increasing evidence that anthropogenic noise can have an impact on not just humans (Smith 1991; Stansfeld & Matheson 2003; Harrison 2008) but many other animals in a variety of taxa (Barber et al. 2010; Slabbekoorn et al. 2010).”
• Habitat urbanization and its effects on birds (2015, background): “Noise pollution may also cause physiological stress, or affect other aspects of behaviour, e.g. it may interfere with sounds playing important roles in predator-prey interactions (Barber et al. 2009).”
• Understanding variation in behavioural responses to human-induced rapid environmental change: a conceptual overview (2013, background): “For example, urban or road noise can mask acoustic cues (Slabbekoorn & Ripmeester 2008; Barber et al. 2010; Slabbekoorn et al. 2010; Møller 2011), human-caused increases in water turbidity can mask visual cues (Wong et al. 2007), and changes in water chemistry can mask chemical cues (Fisher et al.…”
• Serins respond to anthropogenic noise by increasing vocal activity (2011, background): “A nthropogenic noise is increasing worldwide as a consequence of widespread urbanization and the development of transport networks (Marzluff et al. 2001; Barber et al. 2010).”
• Comparative effects of urban development and anthropogenic noise on bird songs (2012, background): “…challenge for animal communication because it increases the masked hearing threshold (threshold of audibility for a specified sound in the presence of another sound) of receivers (Yost 2000; Barber et al. 2010) and thereby limits the signal’s active space (distance over which a sound can be heard).”
• Not so sexy in the city: urban birds adjust songs to noise but compromise vocal performance (2016, neutral): “Anthropogenic noise is part of most modern environments (Barber et al. 2010).”
• Wildlife Conservation and Solar Energy Development in the Desert Southwest, United States (2011, background): “…including changes to their habitat use and activity patterns, increases in stress, weakened immune systems, reduced reproductive success, altered foraging behavior, increased predation risk, degraded communication with conspecifics, and damaged hearing (Barber et al. 2009, Pater et al. 2009).”
• Acoustic communication in a noisy world: can fish compete with anthropogenic noise? (2014, background): “Anthropogenic noises often have prominent frequencies within those naturally occurring windows (McDonald et al. 2006; Barber et al. 2009) and thus have the potential to dis-”
• Ultimate and proximate mechanisms underlying the occurrence of bears close to human settlements: review and management implications (2014, background): “Avoidance of humans by LCs creates predator-relaxed habitats, protected by so-called human shields, for several species (Berger 2007, Barber et al. 2009). Brown bears displace black bears (MacHutchon et al. 1998, Belant et al. 2006, 2010, Fortin et al. 2007, Garneau et al. 2008) through interference”
• Noise negatively affects foraging and antipredator behaviour in shore crabs (2013, background): “In recent decades, human activities such as urban development, expansion of transport networks and resource extraction have added considerable noise to both terrestrial and aquatic environments across the globe, and led to major changes in the acoustic landscape (see McDonald et al. 2006; Watts et a”
• Road traffic noise modifies behaviour of a keystone species (2014, background): “While the behavioural shifts observed during our study appear to reflect the increased stress and fear associated directly with the disturbance generated by traffic noise, further research is required to explore the contribution of acoustic masking (Barber et al., 2010) and distraction (Chan et al.”
• Celestial patterns in marine soundscapes (2014, background): “Finally, through industrial activity and shipping traffic, anthrophony in the ocean has in creased in the last few decades (Andrew et al. 2011) and can interfere with animal communication systems (Clark et al. 2009, Barber et al. 2010, Slabbe koorn et al. 2010).”