Rivers and roads, silence and songs: female crickets respond similarly to conspecific male song in natural and anthropogenic soundscapes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many studies have demonstrated that anthropogenic noise affects animals' auditory perception of salient stimuli. Few have tested whether these effects are different from those experienced in nature. We tested the ability of female field crickets, Teleogryllus oceanicus, to phonotactically locate a speaker playing conspecific male song in four acoustic backgrounds: silence, road noise, river noise and heterospecific song. Crickets approaching conspecific song paused more frequently in river noise and heterospecific song treatments compared with silence or road noise. We also recorded auditory interneuron (AN1 and AN2) activity under the first three acoustic background treatments to construct and compare treatment-specific audiograms and interneuron responses to conspecific song. We found little difference in activity, other than that AN2 thresholds for 6 kHz sounds (the tested frequency closest to male song) were highest in river noise, while heterospecific song increased baseline AN2 activity and reduced AN2 activity to conspecific song onset. Our results suggest road noise is not necessarily a greater disturbance than river noise.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".