ArticlePeerJ2022
Evaluating acoustic signals to reduce avian collision risk.
Article in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Individual Escape Flight Performance Is Repeatable and Differs Between Long-Tailed Finch (Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Linking performance to powerhouse: mitochondrial aerobic metabolism in blood cells reflects flight endurance of house sparrows (Biology letters · 2025Article
- Exposure to Sublethal Concentrations of Lead (Pb) Affects Ecologically Relevant Behaviors in House Sparrows (Passer domesticus).Archives of environmental contamination and toxicology · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Collisions with human-made structures are responsible for billions of bird deaths each year, resulting in ecological damage as well as regulatory and financial burdens to many industries. Acoustic signals can alert birds to obstacles in their flight paths in order to mitigate collisions, but these signals should be tailored to the sensory ecology of birds in flight as the effectiveness of various acoustic signals potentially depends on the influence of background noise and the relative ability of various sound types to propagate within a landscape. We measured changes in flight behaviors from zebra finches released into a flight corridor containing a physical obstacle, either in no-additional-sound control conditions or when exposed to one of four acoustic signals. We selected signals to test two frequency ranges (4-6 kHz or 6-8 kHz) and two temporal modulation patterns (broadband or frequency-modulated oscillating) to determine whether any particular combination of sound attributes elicited the strongest collision avoidance behaviors. We found that, relative to control flights, all sound treatments caused birds to maintain a greater distance from hazards and to adjust their flight trajectories before coming close to obstacles. There were no statistical differences among different sound treatments, but consistent trends within the data suggest that the 4-6 kHz frequency-modulated oscillating signal elicited the strongest avoidance behaviors. We conclude that a variety of acoustic signals can be effective as avian collision deterrents, at least in the context in which we tested these birds. These results may be most directly applicable in scenarios when birds are at risk of collisions with solid structures, such as wind turbines and communication towers, as opposed to window collisions or collisions involving artificial lighting. We recommend the incorporation of acoustic signals into multimodal collision deterrents and demonstrate the value of using behavioral data to assess collision risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.