Suffering in receivers: negative effects of noise persist regardless of experience in female anurans
Suffering in receivers: negative effects of noise persist regardless of experience in female anurans
复制标题
接收者的痛苦：无论雌性无尾目动物的经历如何，噪音的负面影响仍然存在
DOI：
10.1111/1365-2435.13130
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
5.2
通讯作者：
Nakamura F.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Senzaki M;Kadoya T;Francis CD;Ishiyama N;Nakamura F.
人为噪声是一种普遍存在的噪声，越来越多的证据表明，它可以通过多种不同的机制对动物产生负面影响，包括掩蔽线索和信号、干扰和厌恶噪声。声学掩蔽受到了研究人员的最大关注，最近的证据表明，掩蔽效应可以通过改变信号的频率或幅度来减轻。此外，改变可以是通过先前的噪声暴露经验而习得的反应。然而，目前还不清楚是否分心或厌恶的影响，由于噪音可以减轻先前的经验与噪音，特别是在信号receivers.在这里，我们解决了这一差距，通过分离机制的噪音干扰女性phonotaxis对男性的广告呼吁无尾两栖动物。为了做到这一点，我们实验性地检查了怀孕女性的趋声性，这些女性在三种声学操作下对噪声的先前经验不同：频谱重叠和非重叠噪声，分别掩盖或不掩盖男性广告呼叫，加上沉默的对照。我们证实了嘈杂场所个体相对于安静场所个体的两种经验依赖性反应：在非重叠噪声下更快地启动趋声性，对重叠噪声有更强的厌恶反应。然而，我们发现，对于噪音和安静场所的个体，重叠和非重叠的噪音处理都导致了相对于安静对照处理的趋声性延迟启动和定向障碍。我们的研究提供了第一个证据来证明，尽管先前的经验似乎减轻了分心或厌恶噪音的负面影响，先前的经验福尔斯不足以通过趋声性完全补偿中断的定向。此外，尽管大多数研究都强调掩蔽生物相关的线索和信号是噪音对野生生物产生负面影响的最突出机制，但我们发现，不重叠的噪音不会导致信号和线索掩蔽，可能会通过分心或厌恶反应产生负面后果。这一发现表明，噪声的影响可能远远超出了涉及声学线索检测和辨别的背景，值得研究人员更多地关注。
Anthropogenic noise is widespread, and growing evidence suggests that it can negatively affect animals through many different mechanisms including masking of cues and signals, distraction, and aversion to noise.Acoustic masking has received the most attention from researchers and recent evidence suggests that masking effects can be mitigated by alteration of signal frequencies or amplitudes by signalers. Additionally, alteration can be a learned response via prior experience with noise exposure. However, it remains unclear whether distraction or aversive effects due to noise can be mitigated by prior experience with noise, especially among signal receivers.Here, we addressed this gap by separating mechanisms of noise disturbances on female phonotaxis towards male advertisement calls in anurans. To do this, we experimentally examined phonotaxis of gravid females that differ in their prior experience with noise under three acoustic manipulations: spectrally overlapping and non‐overlapping noise that either mask or do not mask male advertisement calls respectively, plus a silent control.We confirm two experience‐dependent responses of noisy‐site individuals relative to quiet‐site individuals: faster initiation of phonotaxis under non‐overlapping noise and a stronger aversive response against overlapping noise. However, we showed that, for both noisy‐ versus quiet‐site individuals, both overlapping and non‐overlapping noise treatments resulted in delayed initiation and disorientation of phonotaxis relative to silent control treatments.Our study provides the first evidence to demonstrate that, although prior experience appears to mitigate the negative effects of distraction or aversion to noise, prior experience falls short of fully compensating for disrupted orientation through phonotaxis. Additionally, although most studies have emphasized masking of biologically relevant cues and signals as the most prominent mechanism by which noise negatively affects wild organisms, we show that non‐overlapping noise, which cannot cause signal and cue masking, can have negative consequences via distraction or aversive responses. This finding suggests that noise impacts could extend well beyond contexts involving acoustic cue detection and discrimination and deserves increased attention by researchers.A plain language summary is available for this article.