Say what? On the transmission of acoustic signals in a Neotropical green city

Cities do not only represent noisy systems, but also limit acoustic communication given the complex array of artificial structures through which signals can be trapped or obscured. In this study we performed a field experiment to evaluate the loss of energy of a standardized acoustic emission (generated with notes and a call of the Clay-colored Thrush – Turdus grayi). For this, we emitted the acoustic signal and recovered it at increasing radial distances from 26 fixed emission points (i.e., 10 m, 20 m, 40 m, 80 m, 120 m, 160 m) located across the city of Xalapa (Mexico). Our results show that the emitted signal was not recorded beyond 80 m from the emission point. The number and height of the assessed physical obstacles between the emitted signal and the receiving equipment showed to drive our main result, with built elements representing a major barrier than vegetation ones in terms of the recovered energy of the emitted signal. Interestingly, we found that, for both types of physical obstacles, a height of ~7 m was a common threshold influencing the recovered energy of the emitted signal.

Effect of traffic noise on Scinax nasicus advertisement call (Amphibia, Anura)

ABSTRACT Increased anthropogenic-made sounds such as traffic noises contribute to acoustic pollution, which produces deleterious effect on song-vertebrates. We compared the advertisement call of Scinax nasicus (Cope, 1862) males in natural (as a reference or control, Site A) and Sites affected by traffic noises (Site B). Call structure was recorded and it was amplified in sonograms (software Raven Pro 1.5). Seven variables were measured on its advertisement call: duration (s), number of notes, number of pulses per note, maximum and minimum frequency (kHz), dominant frequency (kHz) and amplitude (dB). In addition, at each Site the background noise (the fundamental frequency, F0 and amplitude, dB) was measured. The amplitude of background noise reached higher values (68.02 dB) in Site B, while in Site A was lower (34.81 dB). Thus, the F0 in Site A was 6.28 kHz and in Site B it was 4.15 kHz. Frog call in noisy environment (Site B) were characterized by lesser duration (s) and number of pulses per note, higher maximum and dominant frequencies (kHz), lower minimum frequencies, and amplitude (dB) when compared with control environment (Site A). Our study highlights, that S. nasicus males shift their vocal structure in traffic noisy ponds, mainly by vocal “adjust” of their frequencies and amplitude to counteract masking effect. Finally, acoustic monitoring of anurans on noise environments should be considering the spatial, temporal and spectral overlap between noise and species-specific acoustic behaviour.