MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365148713 · doi:10.3389/fevo.2023.1149097

Anthropogenic noise events perturb acoustic communication networks

2023· article· en· W4365148713 on OpenAlexaff
Nathan J. Kleist, Kurt M. Fristrup, Rachel T. Buxton, Megan F. McKenna, Jacob R. Job, Lisa M. Angeloni, Kevin R. Crooks, George Wittemyer

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Ecology and Evolution · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNational Park ServiceIndian Space Research OrganisationColorado State University
KeywordsNoise (video)WildlifeEnvironmental noiseAmbient noise levelEnvironmental scienceHabitatEcologyNoise pollutionNational parkBackground noiseNoise exposureEvent (particle physics)GeographyBiologyAcousticsComputer scienceNoise reductionAudiologyTelecommunicationsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anthropogenic noise sources impact ecological processes by altering wildlife behavior and interactions with cascading impacts on community structure. The distribution and magnitude of such noise has grown exponentially over the past century, and now inundates even remote areas. Here we investigate biological responses to prolific, anthropogenic noise sources associated with the physical presence of the source (vehicle noise and human voices) and disconnected from it (aircraft overflight). Bioacoustic responses to these noise sources were documented at 103 sites in 40 U. S. National Park units. The presence of bird sounds was noted in 10-s audio samples every 2 min, for 8 days at each site and related to the presence of human voices, vehicle noise, and aircraft noise in the same and preceding samples. Generalized additive models were used to fit smoothing splines to weight the influence of noise in past samples on the probability of detecting bird sounds in the present sample. We found that the probability of hearing birds increased immediately following noise events, and decreased about 2 h after the event. The negative effects were persistent more than 3 h after a noise event. The persistence of these responses – especially for noise from jets that were many kilometers distant – raises questions about the functional significance and ecological consequences of this altered activity, particularly in light of the widespread and diverse habitats in this study and ubiquity of the noise sources evaluated.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Ecology and EvolutionSame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207