Chronic noise unexpectedly increases fitness of a freshwater zooplankton

  1. Loïc Prosnier
  2. Emilie Rojas
  3. Olivier Valéro
  4. Vincent Médoc

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Although there is an increasing interest in the effects of anthropogenic noise on animals, aquatic studies mainly focus on organisms with hearing systems (marine mammals, fish, great arthropods) while many others of substantial ecological importance are not considered. Here we show that the water flea Daphnia magna , a widespread zooplankton species serving as food source for higher trophic levels, could be affected by noise pollution in a way that we did not expect. We found that isolated individuals exposed to a continuous broadband sound have a higher survival and fecundity, thus a higher fitness. We also found that they are slower than individuals not exposed to additional noise. It could be that the energy saved from reduced mobility is reallocated to fitness. In natural systems, this reduced velocity should result in a more negative outcome for Daphnia ’s fitness due to competition and predation. Our result highlights that, despite the absence of a known hearing system, a small crustacean can be affected by noise. Consequently, anthropogenic noise can not only affect communities through top-down cascading effects, when it changes the behaviour of top-predators like fish, but also via bottom-up effects with alterations in zooplankton.

Article activity feed

  1. PREreview

    This Zenodo record is a permanently preserved version of a Structured PREreview. You can view the complete PREreview at https://prereview.org/reviews/11399083.

    Does the introduction explain the objective of the research presented in the preprint? Yes
    Are the methods well-suited for this research? Highly appropriate
    Are the conclusions supported by the data? Highly supported
    Are the data presentations, including visualizations, well-suited to represent the data? Highly appropriate and clear
    How clearly do the authors discuss, explain, and interpret their findings and potential next steps for the research? Very clearly
    Is the preprint likely to advance academic knowledge? Highly likely
    Would it benefit from language editing? No
    Would you recommend this preprint to others? Yes, it's of high quality
    Is it ready for attention from an editor, publisher or broader audience? Yes, as it is

    Competing interests

    The author declares that they have no competing interests.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2022.11.19.517212v2 on bioRxiv
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2022.11.19.517212v1 on bioRxiv