Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBooth, CG
dc.contributor.authorBrannan, N
dc.contributor.authorDunlop, R
dc.contributor.authorFriedlander, A
dc.contributor.authorIsojunno, S
dc.contributor.authorMiller, P
dc.contributor.authorQuick, Nicola
dc.contributor.authorSouthall, B
dc.contributor.authorPirotta, E
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-25T11:45:17Z
dc.date.issued2022-07-27
dc.identifier.issn0021-8790
dc.identifier.issn1365-2656
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/19579
dc.description.abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p> <jats:list> <jats:list-item><jats:p>The assessment of behavioural disturbance in cetacean species (e.g. resulting from exposure to anthropogenic sources such as military sonar, seismic surveys, or pile driving) is important for effective conservation and management. Disturbance effects can be informed by Behavioural Response Studies (BRSs), involving either controlled exposure experiments (CEEs) where noise exposure conditions are presented deliberately to meet experimental objectives or in opportunistic contexts where ongoing activities are monitored in a strategic manner. In either context, animal‐borne sensors or in situ observations can provide information on individual exposure and disturbance responses.</jats:p></jats:list-item> <jats:list-item><jats:p>The past 15 years of research have greatly expanded our understanding of behavioural responses to noise, including hundreds of experiments in nearly a dozen cetacean species. Many papers note limited sample sizes, required knowledge of baseline behaviour prior to exposure and the importance of contextual factors modulating behavioural responses, all of which in combination can lead to sampling biases, even for well‐designed research programs.</jats:p></jats:list-item> <jats:list-item><jats:p>It is critical to understand these biases to robustly identify responses. This ensures outcomes of BRSs help inform predictions of how anthropogenic disturbance impacts individuals and populations. Our approach leverages concepts from the animal behaviour literature focused on helping to avoid sampling bias by considering what shapes an animal's response. These factors include social, experience, genetic and natural changes in responsiveness.</jats:p></jats:list-item> <jats:list-item><jats:p>We developed and applied a modified version of this framework to synthesise current knowledge on cetacean response in the context of effects observed across marine and terrestrial taxa. This new ‘Sampling, Exposure, Receptor’ framework (SERF) identifies 43 modulating factors, highlights potential biases, and assesses how these vary across selected focal species.</jats:p></jats:list-item> <jats:list-item><jats:p>In contrast to studies that identified variation in ‘Exposure’ factors as a key concern, our analysis indicated that factors relating to ‘Sampling’ (e.g. deploying tags on less evasive individuals, which biases selection of subjects), and ‘Receptor’ (e.g. health status or coping style) have the greatest potential for weakening the desired broad representativeness of BRSs. Our assessment also highlights how potential biases could be addressed with existing datasets or future developments.</jats:p></jats:list-item> </jats:list> </jats:p>

dc.format.extent1948-1960
dc.format.mediumPrint-Electronic
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherWiley
dc.subjectanthropogenic disturbance
dc.subjectbehavioural responses
dc.subjectmarine mammals
dc.subjectmodulating factors
dc.subjectunderwater noise
dc.titleA sampling, exposure and receptor framework for identifying factors that modulate behavioural responses to disturbance in cetaceans
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.typeResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000837886900001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=11bb513d99f797142bcfeffcc58ea008
plymouth.issue10
plymouth.volume91
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalJournal of Animal Ecology
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/1365-2656.13787
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Science and Engineering
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Science and Engineering/School of Biological and Marine Sciences
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dc.publisher.placeEngland
dcterms.dateAccepted2022-06-26
dc.rights.embargodate2022-8-26
dc.identifier.eissn1365-2656
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1111/1365-2656.13787
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2022-07-27
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV