Anthropogenic noise in terrestrial Antarctica: a short review of background information, challenges and opportunities

Lucia Ziegler; Alvaro Soutullo

doi:10.33265/polar.v43.9859

Lucia Ziegler Department of Ecology and Environmental Management, Eastern Region University Centre, University of the Republic, Maldonado, Uruguay https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6663-4338
Alvaro Soutullo Department of Ecology and Environmental Management, Eastern Region University Centre, University of the Republic, Maldonado, Uruguay https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3198-7878

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33265/polar.v43.9859

Keywords: Antarctic soundscapes, acoustic monitoring, wildlife, environmental management, marine mammals, penguins

Abstract

Anthropogenic noise is an inevitable by-product of human activities. However, the potential effects of human noise on terrestrial Antarctica’s ecosystems have been understudied. Documented impacts encompass stress, alterations in behavioural patterns, auditory masking, and, in severe instances, mortality. This Perspective note aims to call attention to human-generated noise as potential sources of impact on Antarctic wildlife and to highlight the potential of soundscape analysis as a flexible, cost-effective tool for environmental monitoring across Antarctica, complementing other non-invasive approaches. Acoustic monitoring in terrestrial environments has been extensively used in different parts of the world to assess biodiversity, monitor populations’ status and trends, and identify and monitor sources of anthropogenic disturbance. Technological advances in passive acoustic monitoring allow for the gathering of detailed information with little need of human attention, and powerful processing tools and algorithms enable researchers to analyse large collections of audio data. Cold climates limit battery-operated instruments, but solar panels in Antarctic summer trials revealed over 100 days of unattended operation, which is promising for the incorporation of acoustic monitoring in Antarctica’s environmental management toolbox.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Acevedo E., Espinosa M.N. & Stolovas I. 2023. Sensado, monitoreo y estudio de entorno sonoro para la evaluación del impacto antropogénico en la Antártida (SERENA). (Censusing, monitoring and study of the acoustic environment for the evaluation of anthropogenic impact in Antarctica [SERENA].) Montevideo: Electrical Engineering Institute, University of the Republic.

Acosta L. 2021. Mapeo sistemático del sonido antrópico terrestre en la Antártida. (Systematic mapping of terrestrial anthropogenic noise in Antarctica.) Maldonado: East Regional University Centre, University of the Republic.

Appel C.L., Lesmeister D.B., Duarte A., Davis R.J., Weldy M.J. & Levi T. 2023. Using passive acoustic monitoring to estimate northern spotted owl landscape use and pair occupancy. Ecosphere 14, e4421, doi: 10.1002/ecs2.4421.

Barber J.R., Crooks K.R. & Fristrup K.M. 2010. The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 25, 180–189, doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2009.08.002.

Berger-Tal O., Wong B., Candolin U. & Barber J. 2019. What evidence exists on the effects of anthropogenic noise on acoustic communication in animals? A systematic map protocol. Environmental Evidence 8 (Suppl. 1), article no. 1, doi: 10.1186/s13750-019-0165-3.

Blumstein D.T., Mennill D.J., Clemins P., Girod L., Yao K., Patricelli G., Deppe J.L., Krakauer A.H., Clark C. & Cortopassi K.A. 2011. Acoustic monitoring in terrestrial environments using microphone arrays: applications, technological considerations and prospectus. Journal of Applied Ecology 48, 758–767, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.01993.x.

Brooks S.T., Jabour J. & Bergstrom D.M. 2018. What is “footprint” in Antarctica: proposing a set of definitions. Antarctic Science 30, 227–235, doi: 10.1017/S0954102018000172.

Brooks S.T., Jabour J., van den Hoff J. & Bergstrom D.M. 2019. Our footprint on Antarctica competes with nature for rare ice-free land. Nature Sustainability 2, 185–190, doi: 10.1038/s41893-019-0237-y.

Browning E., Gibb R., Glover-Kapfer P. & Jones K.E. 2017. Passive acoustic monitoring in ecology and conservation. WWF Conservation Technology 1(2). Woking: World Wildlife Fund.

Buxton R.T., McKenna M.F., Mennitt D., Fristrup K., Crooks K., Angeloni L. & Wittemyer G. 2017. Noise pollution is pervasive in US protected areas. Science 356, 531–533, doi: 10.1126/science.aah4783.

Christin S., Chicoine C., O’Neill Sanger T., Guigueno M.F., Hansen J., Lanctot R.B., MacNearney D., Rausch J., Saalfeld S.T., Schmidt N.M., Smith P.A., Woodard P.F., Hervet É. & Lecomte N. 2023. ArcticBirdSounds: an open-access, multiyear, and detailed annotated dataset of bird songs and calls. Ecology 104, e4047, doi: 10.1002/ecy.4047.

Çoban E.B., Perra M., Pir D. & Mandel M. 2022. EDANSA-2019: The Ecoacoustic Dataset from Arctic North Slope Alaska. In M. Lagrange et al. (eds.): Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Detection and Classification of Acoustic Scenes and Events (DCASE 2022). Pp. 16–20. Tampere, Finland: Tampere University.

Desjonquères C., Gifford T. & Linke S. 2020. Passive acoustic monitoring as a potential tool to survey animal and ecosystem processes in freshwater environments. Freshwater Biology 65, 7–19, doi: 10.1111/fwb.13356.

Duarte C.M., Chapuis L., Collin S.P., Costa D.P., Devassy R.P., Eguiluz V.M., Erbe C., Gordon T.A., Halpern B.S. & Harding H.R. 2021. The soundscape of the Anthropocene ocean. Science 371, eaba4658, doi: 10.1126/science.aba4658.

Duquette C.A., Loss S.R. & Hovick T.J. 2021. A meta‐analysis of the influence of anthropogenic noise on terrestrial wildlife communication strategies. Journal of Applied Ecology 58, 1112–1121, doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.13880.

Dziak R.P., Bohnenstiehl D.R., Stafford K.M., Matsumoto H., Park M., Lee W.S., Fowler M.J., Lau T.-K., Haxel J.H. & Mellinger D.K. 2015. Sources and levels of ambient ocean sound near the Antarctic Peninsula. PLoS One 10, e0123425, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123425.

Ferguson L.A., Newman P., McKenna M.F., Betchkal D.H., Miller Z.D., Keller R., Fristrup K.M. & Taff B.D. 2023. How much noise is too much? Methods for identifying thresholds for soundscape quality and ecosystem services. Applied Acoustics 209, article no. 109388, doi: 10.1016/j.apacoust.2023.109388.

Francis C.D. & Barber J.R. 2013. A framework for understanding noise impacts on wildlife: an urgent conservation priority. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 11, 305–313, doi: 10.1890/120183.

Francomano D., Raya Rey A.N., Gottesman B.L. & Pijanowski B.C. 2023. Acoustic recording complements camera traps for monitoring sensitive penguin populations. Ibis 166, 38–54, doi: 10.1111/ibi.13235.

Gibb R., Browning E., Glover‐Kapfer P. & Jones K.E. 2019. Emerging opportunities and challenges for passive acoustics in ecological assessment and monitoring. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 10, 169–185, doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13101.

Harris C.M. 2005. Aircraft operations near concentrations of birds in Antarctica: the development of practical guidelines. Biological Conservation 125, 309–322, doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2005.04.002.

Haver S.M., Rand Z., Hatch L.T., Lipski D., Dziak R.P., Gedamke J., Haxel J., Heppell S.A., Jahncke J. & McKenna M.F. 2020. Seasonal trends and primary contributors to the low-frequency soundscape of the Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 148, 845–858, doi: 10.1121/10.0001726.

Hogg C.J., Lea M.-A., Gual Soler M., Vasquez V.N., Payo-Payo A., Parrott M.L., Santos M.M., Shaw J. & Brooks C.M. 2020. Protect the Antarctic Peninsula—before it’s too late. Nature 586, 496–499, doi: 10.1038/d41586-020-02939-5.

Jerem P. & Mathews F. 2021. Trends and knowledge gaps in field research investigating effects of anthropogenic noise. Conservation Biology 35, 115–129, doi: 10.1111/cobi.13510.

Kleist N.J., Fristrup K.M., Buxton R.T., McKenna M.F., Job J.R., Angeloni L.M., Crooks K. & Wittemyer G. 2023. Anthropogenic noise events perturb acoustic communication networks. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 11, article no. 1149097, doi: 10.3389/fevo.2023.1149097.

Kleist N.J., Guralnick R.P., Cruz A., Lowry C.A. & Francis C.D. 2018. Chronic anthropogenic noise disrupts glucocorticoid signaling and has multiple effects on fitness in an avian community. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115, E648–E657, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1709200115.

Kok A., Berkhout B.W., Carlson N.V., Evans N.P., Khan N., Potvin D.A., Radford A.N., Sebire M., Shafiei Sabet S. & Shannon G. 2023. How chronic anthropogenic noise can affect wildlife communities. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 11, article no. 1130075, doi: 10.3389/fevo.2023.1130075.

Kunc H.P. & Schmidt R. 2019. The effects of anthropogenic noise on animals: a meta-analysis. Biology Letters 15, article no. 20190649, doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2019.0649.

Law B.S., Brassil T., Gonsalves L., Roe P., Truskinger A. & McConville A. 2018. Passive acoustics and sound recognition provide new insights on status and resilience of an iconic endangered marsupial (koala Phascolarctos cinereus) to timber harvesting. PLoS One 13, e0205075, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205075.

Lee J.R., Terauds A., Carwardine J., Shaw J.D., Fuller R.A., Possingham H.P., Chown S.L., Convey P., Gilbert N. & Hughes K.A. 2022. Threat management priorities for conserving Antarctic biodiversity. PLoS biology 20, e3001921, doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001921.

Marques T.A., Thomas L., Martin S.W., Mellinger D.K., Ward J.A., Moretti D.J., Harris D. & Tyack P.L. 2013. Estimating animal population density using passive acoustics. Biological Reviews 88, 287–309, doi: 10.1111/brv.12001.

McKenna M.F., Shannon G. & Fristrup K. 2016. Characterizing anthropogenic noise to improve understanding and management of impacts to wildlife. Endangered Species Research 31, 279–291, doi: 10.3354/esr00760.

Pijanowski B.C., Farina A., Gage S.H., Dumyahn S.L. & Krause B.L. 2011. What is soundscape ecology? An introduction and overview of an emerging new science. Landscape Ecology 26, 1213–1232, doi: 10.1007/s10980-011-9600-8.

Purser J. & Radford A.N. 2011. Acoustic noise induces attention shifts and reduces foraging performance in three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus). PLoS One 6, e17478, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017478.

Shannon G., McKenna M.F., Angeloni L.M., Crooks K.R., Fristrup K.M., Brown E., Warner K.A., Nelson M.D., White C. & Briggs J. 2016. A synthesis of two decades of research documenting the effects of noise on wildlife. Biological Reviews 91, 982–1005, doi: 10.1111/brv.12207.

Stevenson B.C., van Dam-Bates P., Young C.K. & Measey J. 2021. A spatial capture–recapture model to estimate call rate and population density from passive acoustic surveys. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 12, 432–442, doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13522.

Sugai L.S.M., Desjonqueres C., Silva T.S.F. & Llusia D. 2020. A roadmap for survey designs in terrestrial acoustic monitoring. Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation 6, 220–235, doi: 10.1002/rse2.131.

Sveegaard S., Galatius A., Dietz R., Kyhn L., Koblitz J.C., Amundin M., Nabe-Nielsen J., Sinding M.-H.S., Andersen L.W. & Teilmann J. 2015. Defining management units for cetaceans by combining genetics, morphology, acoustics and satellite tracking. Global Ecology and Conservation 3, 839–850, doi: 10.1016/j.gecco.2015.04.002.

Tejedo P., Benayas J., Cajiao D., Leung Y.-F., De Filippo D. & Liggett D. 2022. What are the real environmental impacts of Antarctic tourism? Unveiling their importance through a comprehensive meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Management 308, article no. 114634, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.114634.

Tin T., Fleming Z.L., Hughes K.A., Ainley D.G., Convey P., Moreno C.A., Pfeiffer S., Scott J. & Snape I. 2009. Impacts of local human activities on the Antarctic environment. Antarctic Science 21, 3–33, doi: 10.1017/S0954102009001722.

Tiwari A.K. 2017. Environmental monitoring around Indian Antarctic stations. Proceedings of Indian National Science Academy 83, 399–413, doi: 10.16943/ptinsa/2017/48964.

Van Hoeck R.V., Paxton A.B., Bohnenstiehl D.R., Taylor J.C., Fodrie F.J. & Peterson C.H. 2021. Passive acoustic monitoring complements traditional methods for assessing marine habitat enhancement outcomes. Ecosphere 12, e03840, doi: 10.1002/ecs2.3840.