An Analysis of Potential Impacts from Simulated Vessel Noise and Sonar on Commercially - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

An Analysis of Potential Impacts from Simulated Vessel Noise and Sonar on Commercially Important Invertebrates

Dr. Jason Krumholz1, Dr. Dave Hudson2, Darby Pochtar3, Natasha Dickenson4, Dr. Georges Dossot4, Ed Baker5 , Tara Moll41McLaughlin Research Corporation, Middletown, RI2 The Maritime Aquarium at Norwalk, Norwalk CT3University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI4 Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division Newport, RI5 University of Rhode Island Graduate School of Oceanography, Narragansett, RI

Slide2

Background

Invertebrates “hear” at 10-1000 Hz* but may “feel” vibration and presssure from other frequencies*. Previous research* indicates sublethal impacts such as:StressDisruption in feedingSluggish return to shelterIncreased energy expenditure

Potentially

additive for species already facing population stress from fisheries

Noise Level

A

bove Ambient (dB re 1µPa @1m, 60 Hz)

*Celi et al. 2015; Filiciotto et al. 2014; Popper et al. 2001;Wale et al. 2013; Edmonds et al. 2016

Reduced Fitness

NOAA, 2012

Slide3

The Players:

Blue Crab (Callinectes sapidus)American Lobster (Homarus americanus) Present along much of US east coast, along with heavy maritime trafficEstablished methods for assessing behavioral (activity/shelter) and physiological (stress) response

DM Hudson 2017

DM Hudson 2017

Slide4

Tank Design

Common design: source on one side, and hydrophone on the otherMore “natural” BUTUneven sound field edge effectspeaks and nulls from reflection“Standing wave tube” design:More uniform sound field

Can quantify both sound pressure and particle motion

Source

Cameras

4 replicate enclosures

From

C

eli

et al. 2015

Slide5

Acoustic

Signals

Source

Cameras

4 replicate enclosures

From

C

eli

et al. 2015

Low frequency

–

simulated merchant vessel noise, broadband with significant mechanical-borne harmonics (e.g. 60 Hz). Signals transmitted from a USRD

*

J-11 acoustic projector

.

SPL

of 169-172 dB re 1µPa.

Mid-frequency

–

Repetitious pulsed tones at 1667 Hz and chirps between 2.5-4 kHz with one second duration. Signals transmitted from a

Lubbell

Labs source

.

SPL

of 177-182 dB re 1µPa.

Animals were exposed to two types of transmissions:

*

Underwater Sound Reference Division

Slide6

Pen

At low frequencies (below 1 kHz), sound field is uniformAbove 1 kHz, sound field is more complex, including nulls

Pen

Tank Sound Field

Slide7

Exposure Treatments

Animals acclimated, exposed (1hr), then monitoredTreatments: ControlBoat Noise Mid Frequency PART 1: Animals measured for:Acute activity/shelter use (Ethovision XT) Physiology (0-7 days, HSP 27, Glucose)PART 2: Interspecific competitionBlue and green crabs only

Behavior analysis (Ethovision

XT)

opaque shelter

Slide8

Part 1: Acute Activity Level

C. sapidus One-way ANOVA, p = 0.05aaaa,bba

Slide9

Glucose

One-way ANOVA, p = 0.0193One-way ANOVA, p = 0.00357aaaabab

bb

b

b

c

Slide10

Glucose

One-way ANOVA, p < 0.001aaaa,cbaaa,b

a

b

b

c

Slide11

Part 1: Results Summary

BEHAVIOR: Boat noise = reduced activity significant for C. sapidusHSP 27: no differences, either speciesGLUCOSE:Elevated at 0H, and subsequently decreasing in controls Boat noise = Elevated stress after 24H significant for C. sapidus BOTH SPECIES, strong response to MF @ 7 days

Slide12

Part 2: Blue Crab/Green Crab Competition

Assessed interspecific interactions between vessel noise exposed and control blue crabs in the presence of unexposed green crabs Why expose only blue crabs?Blue crabs are broadly distributed(water column, deep channels, intertidal)Green crabs are more commonly found in shallow, intertidal areasBoat noise at potentially damaging levels (>130 dB) does not propagate farBlue crabs are more likely to be exposed toboat noise than green crabs

Slide13

Part 2: Methods

H0: Boat noise exposure will not cause a shift in blue crab behavior when presented with a natural competitor Ha: Exposure to boat noise will alter how the blue crabs respond to a competition scenario

Green

Crab

Food

50.8 cm

50.8 cm

S

helter26.7 cm

Blue

Crab

* Not to scale

Slide14

Behavioral Observations

Slide15

Behavioral Changes in Blue Crab due to Boat Noise Exposure

***One-way ANOVA = p < 0.05

Slide16

Part 2: Results Summary

Behavioral impacts with exposure to boat noise include:Increase in aggressive behavior Decrease in feeding behavior Reduced locomotion during testing (significant for C. sapidus only)Behavioral shift could result in decreased fitness

Slide17

Future Work:

Acute vs. Chronic

Improve understanding of 7-day glucose spike

Study physiological and behavioral response to long term exposure

Acute response

: crab eventually has ‘normal’ behavior again

Chronic response

: the shift in behavior persists

Slide18

Acknowledgements

United States Fleet Forces Command, Laura BuschJoe Iafrate, Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division NewportCandace Oviatt, University of Rhode Island Graduate School of Oceanography Lisa Kaplan, Quinnipiac UniversityBrianne Neptin, University of Rhode Island

Slide19

BACKUP SLIDES

Slide20

Methods

Exposure conducted similar to previous experiment 24 hours later, the competition experiments were performed:Acclimated for 1 hour1 hour trialVideo recorded (GoPro) and behaviors categorized with EthovisionXTTrial Setup:Food in one corner and shelter in opposite cornerMatched pairs based on wet weightHypothesis

H0: Boat noise exposure will not cause a shift in blue crab behavior when presented with a natural competitor

H

a

:

Exposure

to boat noise will alter how the blue crabs respond to a competition scenario

Slide21

Acoustic pressure levels

Low frequency: Levels 60-1000 Hz show a relatively uniform broadband sound field. Frequency variability on the order of 5 dB.

Mid-frequency

: Chirps vary between 177-182 dB re 1µPa over the exposure area

Sweep/ chirp transitions through a frequency range, which levels out pressure levels over the exposure area.

Slide22

Objectives

Create a uniform exposure zone suitable for the biological study’s requirements

Base the tank geometry around a standing wave tube approach

Empirically quantify the acoustic pressure and particle acceleration fields the crustaceans were exposed to.

Methods

Spatially quantify the sound field and in terms of pressure and particle motion between 60Hz and 4

kHz for the entire tank

Measure the acoustic pressure at maximum exposure levels using an F42 reference phone.

Measure the pressure and particle acceleration fields using an acoustic vector sensor

 

 

 

 

A comprehensive understanding of the sound field employed during exposure trials

Acoustic measurements

5 cm sampling grid!

Slide23

Low-frequency pressure and particle motion

Radial dependenceAcoustic vector sensor measurements taken at the pen height, providing acoustic pressure and particle acceleration levels. Source level adjusted for measurement purposes (not indicative of exposure levels). Particle velocity calculated by integrating accelerometer signals. At low frequencies the acoustic wavelength is less than tank diameter. Therefore the acoustic field varies similar to a standing wave tube. Particle acceleration levels at the pen height are stable.

Slide24

Low-frequency pressure and particle motion

Vertical dependenceAcoustic vector sensor measurements taken along the vertical dimension of the tank, providing acoustic pressure and particle acceleration levels. Source level adjusted for measurement purposes (not indicative of exposure levels). Particle velocity calculated by integrating accelerometer signals. At low frequencies the acoustic wavelength is less than tank diameter. Therefore the acoustic field varies similar to a standing wave tube. Particle acceleration levels at the pen (35 cm) height are stable. Pen

Slide25

Mid-frequency pressure and particle motion

Radial dependenceAcoustic vector sensor measurements taken at the pen height, providing acoustic pressure and particle acceleration levels. Source level adjusted for measurement purposes (not indicative of exposure levels). Particle velocity calculated by integrating accelerometer signals. At mid-frequencies the acoustic wavelength is comparable or shorter than the tank diameter. Therefore the acoustic field varies much more dramatically. Several acoustic modes may exist.

Slide26

Mid-frequency pressure and particle motion

Vertical dependenceAcoustic vector sensor measurements taken along the vertical dimension of the tank, providing acoustic pressure and particle acceleration levels. Source level adjusted for measurement purposes (not indicative of exposure levels). Particle velocity calculated by integrating accelerometer signals. PenAt mid-frequencies the acoustic wavelength is comparable or shorter than the tank diameter. Therefore the acoustic field varies much more dramatically. Several acoustic modes may exist.

Slide27

Collection Area

Collected crabs from marsh off Galilee Escape Rd, Narragansett RI