skip to main content


Search for: All records

Creators/Authors contains: "Sweet, K. A."

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. Abstract

    Animals glean information about risk from their habitat. The acoustic environment is one such source of information, and is an important, yet understudied ecological axis. Although anthropogenic noise has become recently ubiquitous, risk mitigation behaviors have likely been shaped by natural noise over millennia. Listening animals have been shown to increase vigilance and decrease foraging in both natural and anthropogenic noise. However, direct comparisons could be informative to conservation and understanding evolutionary drivers of behavior in noise. Here, we used 27 song sparrows (Melospiza melodia) and 148 laboratory behavioral trials to assess foraging and vigilance behavior in both anthropogenic and natural noise sources. Using five acoustic environments (playbacks of roadway traffic, a whitewater river, a whitewater river shifted upwards in frequency, a river with the amplitude modulation of roadway traffic, and an ambient control), we attempt to parse out the acoustic characteristics that make a foraging habitat risky. We found that sparrows increased vigilance or decreased foraging in 4 of 6 behaviors when foraging in higher sound levels regardless of the noise source or variation in frequency and amplitude modulation. These responses may help explain previously reported declines in abundance of song sparrows exposed to playback of intense river noise. Our results imply that natural soundscapes have likely shaped behavior long before anthropogenic noise, and that high sound levels negatively affect the foraging-vigilance trade-off in most intense acoustic environments. Given the ever-increasing footprint of noise pollution, these results imply potential negative consequences for bird populations.

     
    more » « less