Cargando…

Interspecific differences in the effects of masking and distraction on anti-predator behavior in suburban anthropogenic noise

Predation is a common threat to animal survival. The detection of predators or anti-predator communication signals can be disrupted by anthropogenic noise; however, the mechanism by which responses are affected is unclear. Masking and distraction are the two hypotheses that have emerged as likely ex...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chou, Trina L., Krishna, Anjali, Fossesca, Mark, Desai, Avani, Goldberg, Julia, Jones, Sophie, Stephens, Morgan, Basile, Benjamin M., Gall, Megan D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10437853/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37594981
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0290330
_version_ 1785092630945726464
author Chou, Trina L.
Krishna, Anjali
Fossesca, Mark
Desai, Avani
Goldberg, Julia
Jones, Sophie
Stephens, Morgan
Basile, Benjamin M.
Gall, Megan D.
author_facet Chou, Trina L.
Krishna, Anjali
Fossesca, Mark
Desai, Avani
Goldberg, Julia
Jones, Sophie
Stephens, Morgan
Basile, Benjamin M.
Gall, Megan D.
author_sort Chou, Trina L.
collection PubMed
description Predation is a common threat to animal survival. The detection of predators or anti-predator communication signals can be disrupted by anthropogenic noise; however, the mechanism by which responses are affected is unclear. Masking and distraction are the two hypotheses that have emerged as likely explanations for changes in behavior in noise. Masking occurs when the signal and noise fall within the same sensory domain; noise overlapping the energy in the signal reduces signal detection. Distraction can occur when noise in any sensory domain contributes to a greater cognitive load, thereby reducing signal detection. Here, we used a repeated measures field experiment to determine the relative contributions of masking and distraction in mediating reduced anti-predator responses in noise. We recorded the approaches and vocalizations of black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus), tufted titmice (Baeolophus bicolor), and white-breasted nuthatches (Sitta carolinensis) to both visual and acoustic cues of predator presence, either with or without simultaneous exposure to anthropogenic noise. Titmice increased their calling to both visual and acoustic cues of predator presence. However, there was no significant effect of noise on the calling responses of titmice regardless of stimulus modality. Noise appeared to produce a distraction effect in chickadees; however, this effect was small, suggesting that chickadees may be relatively unaffected by low levels of anthropogenic noise in suburban environments. White-breasted nuthatch calling behavior was affected by the interaction of the modality of the predator stimulus and the noise condition. Nuthatches had a delayed response to the predator presentations, with a greater calling rate following the presentation of the acoustic stimulus in quiet compared to the presentation of the acoustic stimulus in noise. However, there was no difference in calling rate between the quiet and noise conditions for the visual stimulus. Together this suggests that even moderate levels of noise have some masking effect for white-breasted nuthatches. We suggest that the mechanisms through which noise influences anti-predator behavior may depend on the social roles, foraging ecology and auditory capabilities of each species.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10437853
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104378532023-08-19 Interspecific differences in the effects of masking and distraction on anti-predator behavior in suburban anthropogenic noise Chou, Trina L. Krishna, Anjali Fossesca, Mark Desai, Avani Goldberg, Julia Jones, Sophie Stephens, Morgan Basile, Benjamin M. Gall, Megan D. PLoS One Research Article Predation is a common threat to animal survival. The detection of predators or anti-predator communication signals can be disrupted by anthropogenic noise; however, the mechanism by which responses are affected is unclear. Masking and distraction are the two hypotheses that have emerged as likely explanations for changes in behavior in noise. Masking occurs when the signal and noise fall within the same sensory domain; noise overlapping the energy in the signal reduces signal detection. Distraction can occur when noise in any sensory domain contributes to a greater cognitive load, thereby reducing signal detection. Here, we used a repeated measures field experiment to determine the relative contributions of masking and distraction in mediating reduced anti-predator responses in noise. We recorded the approaches and vocalizations of black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus), tufted titmice (Baeolophus bicolor), and white-breasted nuthatches (Sitta carolinensis) to both visual and acoustic cues of predator presence, either with or without simultaneous exposure to anthropogenic noise. Titmice increased their calling to both visual and acoustic cues of predator presence. However, there was no significant effect of noise on the calling responses of titmice regardless of stimulus modality. Noise appeared to produce a distraction effect in chickadees; however, this effect was small, suggesting that chickadees may be relatively unaffected by low levels of anthropogenic noise in suburban environments. White-breasted nuthatch calling behavior was affected by the interaction of the modality of the predator stimulus and the noise condition. Nuthatches had a delayed response to the predator presentations, with a greater calling rate following the presentation of the acoustic stimulus in quiet compared to the presentation of the acoustic stimulus in noise. However, there was no difference in calling rate between the quiet and noise conditions for the visual stimulus. Together this suggests that even moderate levels of noise have some masking effect for white-breasted nuthatches. We suggest that the mechanisms through which noise influences anti-predator behavior may depend on the social roles, foraging ecology and auditory capabilities of each species. Public Library of Science 2023-08-18 /pmc/articles/PMC10437853/ /pubmed/37594981 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0290330 Text en © 2023 Chou et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Chou, Trina L.
Krishna, Anjali
Fossesca, Mark
Desai, Avani
Goldberg, Julia
Jones, Sophie
Stephens, Morgan
Basile, Benjamin M.
Gall, Megan D.
Interspecific differences in the effects of masking and distraction on anti-predator behavior in suburban anthropogenic noise
title Interspecific differences in the effects of masking and distraction on anti-predator behavior in suburban anthropogenic noise
title_full Interspecific differences in the effects of masking and distraction on anti-predator behavior in suburban anthropogenic noise
title_fullStr Interspecific differences in the effects of masking and distraction on anti-predator behavior in suburban anthropogenic noise
title_full_unstemmed Interspecific differences in the effects of masking and distraction on anti-predator behavior in suburban anthropogenic noise
title_short Interspecific differences in the effects of masking and distraction on anti-predator behavior in suburban anthropogenic noise
title_sort interspecific differences in the effects of masking and distraction on anti-predator behavior in suburban anthropogenic noise
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10437853/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37594981
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0290330
work_keys_str_mv AT choutrinal interspecificdifferencesintheeffectsofmaskinganddistractiononantipredatorbehaviorinsuburbananthropogenicnoise
AT krishnaanjali interspecificdifferencesintheeffectsofmaskinganddistractiononantipredatorbehaviorinsuburbananthropogenicnoise
AT fossescamark interspecificdifferencesintheeffectsofmaskinganddistractiononantipredatorbehaviorinsuburbananthropogenicnoise
AT desaiavani interspecificdifferencesintheeffectsofmaskinganddistractiononantipredatorbehaviorinsuburbananthropogenicnoise
AT goldbergjulia interspecificdifferencesintheeffectsofmaskinganddistractiononantipredatorbehaviorinsuburbananthropogenicnoise
AT jonessophie interspecificdifferencesintheeffectsofmaskinganddistractiononantipredatorbehaviorinsuburbananthropogenicnoise
AT stephensmorgan interspecificdifferencesintheeffectsofmaskinganddistractiononantipredatorbehaviorinsuburbananthropogenicnoise
AT basilebenjaminm interspecificdifferencesintheeffectsofmaskinganddistractiononantipredatorbehaviorinsuburbananthropogenicnoise
AT gallmegand interspecificdifferencesintheeffectsofmaskinganddistractiononantipredatorbehaviorinsuburbananthropogenicnoise