Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39043238›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2024

Anthropogenic noise disrupts acoustic cues for recruitment.

Brittany R Williams, Dominic McAfee, Sean D Connell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Anthropogenic noise disrupts acoustic cues for recruitment.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Brittany R WilliamsSouthern Seas Ecology Laboratories, School of Biological Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3618-2788
Dominic McAfeeSouthern Seas Ecology Laboratories, School of Biological Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8278-8169
Sean D ConnellSouthern Seas Ecology Laboratories, School of Biological Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5005, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5350-6852

Funding

Australian Research CouncilThe Environment InstituteThe Ian Potter Foundationthe South Australian Department of Environment and Water
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anthropogenic noise is rising and may interfere with natural acoustic cues used by organisms to recruit. Newly developed acoustic technology provides enriched settlement cues to boost recruitment of target organisms navigating to restoration sites, but can it boost recruitment in noise-polluted sites? To address this dilemma, we coupled replicated aquarium experiments with field experiments. Under controlled and replicated laboratory conditions, acoustic enrichment boosted recruitment by 2.57 times in the absence of anthropogenic noise, but yielded comparable recruitment in its presence (i.e. no boosting effect). Using the same technique, we then tested the replicability of these responses in real-world settings where independently replicated 'sites' are unfeasible owing to the inherent differences in soundscapes. Again, acoustic enrichment increased recruitment where anthropogenic noise was low (by 3.33 times), but had no effect at a site of noise pollution. Together, these coupled laboratory-to-field outcomes indicate that anthropogenic noise can mask the signal of acoustic enrichment. While noise pollution may reduce the effectiveness of acoustic enrichment, some of our reported observations suggest that anthropogenic noise

Indexed as

CuesNoiseAcousticsAnimalsBehavior, AnimalCrassostreaLarvaacoustic enrichmentanthropogenic noiseecosystem restorationoysterrecruitment

Identifiers

PMID39043238
PMCPMC11265905

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.