.-//f " NTID3O0.5
z 53
EFFECTS
OF NOISE
ON WILDLIFE
ANIMALS
AND
OTHER
DECEMBER 31, 1971
Prepared
by
MEMPHIS
STATE UNIVERSITY
under
CONTRACT
68-04-0024
for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Washington
DC 20460
Tail
;
ropor/
nnd
report
the
• i
reflect
;
a scandord,
_h
ha= been approved
rafJect
the vlevcs
0ccur_y
the official
af
the
vjows
spocifici)tion,
of the
for general
controczor,
_ata
or policy
presented
of EPA
clr regulation.
availabiliW.
who
h_roin,
This
The
¢ontontl
is responsible
ond
r_port
do not
does
of this
for tho facts
n_t
Noce_rlly
constitute
Ii
Table
of
Contents
Page
Introduction
Effects
1
of
Noise
Effects
of
or* Laboratory
Noise
Non-auditory
Effects
of
on
the
Effects
Noise
on
Farm
of
Animals
Auditory
3
System
Noise
4
i0
Animals
24
Effects
of
Noise
on
Mammals
25
Effects
of
Noise
on
Poultry
28
Demonstrated
Effects
of
Noise
on
Wildlife
31
Effects
of
Noise
on
Mammals
32
Effects
of
Noise
on
Birds
33
Effects
of
Noise
on
Fish
36
Effects of Noise on Insects
Suspected
Effects
Interference
Direct
Effects
Of Noise
with
of
on Wildlife
37
40
Signals
41
Noise
44
Discussion
46
Suggestions for Research
49
Appendix
55
References
66
INTRODUCTION
For
was
we
known
be
over
hearing
of
well
documented.
of
today
In
wildlife
several
have
excellent
dangerous
are
is
an
of
upon
man's
there
potentially
of
noise
on
on
man;
considering
man
and
trying
to
effects
serious
noise
concern,
rapidly
growing
in
increasing
and
ever
at
virtually
etc.
of
times
every
a
for
population
noise
potentially
aspect
power
en
of
modern-day
generation,
Tedayww_e,.i±nd
_hat_amaas
remqte,_and._there£ore..mela_t_zely
noise,_are_.now-.being.expose_oz_are__in
exposure
areas
known
years
to
various
kinds
of, noise__pollaZion.
@._f_ts--th&t_inc_e_sed._oise_.leve.ls_.will-h_vQ
these
been
deficit
few
and
in
have
investigators
transportation,
by
hearing
sound
last
sound
of
unwanted
considered
of
to
them.
Our
recreation,
the
effects
many
result
of
of
ears
of
large
information
exposure
loss
the
pessible
reasons,
life--construction_
noa-polluted
a
a matter
by-product
previously
effects
In
the
technolegy
manufacturing,
The
disprove
years
become
Noise
cause
effects
or
recent
advancing
levels.
i
there
demonstrate
cause
non-auditory
non-auditory
either
prolonged
the
suggesting
number
scientific
"artillerymen's"
with
are
possible
in
or
years.
studies
real
ceuld
hundred
consequently,
The
that
a
been
danger_of
known
noise
defective
frightening
and
any
"Boilermakers"
to
have
before
have
intensities
humans.
_i
years
available,
high
for
many
are
virtually
unknown.
Obviously
on _wil_dlife
ani._is
that
2
rely
on
their
behavior,
prey
will
be
that
utilize
more
complex
in
systems
location,
by
threatened
other
ecosystem,
affect
all
sensory
In
nature
the
other
both
man
ecosystem,
Many
species
the
proved
the
threat
we
have
on
our
of
no
ecology
irreparable
it
is
in
noise
of
Because
or
on
our
wildlife.
It
has
become
concerned
on
try
high
with
can
animals,
the
all
the
species
species
Zo
the
organisms
might
a
effects
well
are
a
To
and
Noise
the
pollution
possibly
vulnerable
species.
the
the
to
them
that
to
that
balance
noise
noise
provide
clues
a summary
of
on
of
possible
a serious
on
lack
wildlife.
effects
on
regarding
the
nature,
increases
their
is
effects
possible
expected
there
of
from
species,
possible
prevent
to
relate
Apart
a particular
the
calculate
noise
affects
of
of
consequences
endangered.
loss
effects
balance
_cosys_m_and
of
loss.
of
the
also.
regarding
likelihood
animals
wild
man
today
apparent
concerning
the
due
serious
balanced
wildlife
we
and
laboratory
effects
to
levels
of
However,
with
extinction
such
that
information
a
knowledge
damage
will
whatever
irretrievable
from
mandatory
impact
the
certain
one
etc.,
than
among
have
ecosystem;
wild!ire
the
to
affects
to
of
with
tampering
con__c_eizab!:y GO_id_dlsrupt
contribute
exist
mating
homing,
noise
modalities.
man's
eventually
even
detection,
that
has
and
and
species.
past,
frequently
courtship
increased
interference
the
for
predator
interrelationships
an
for
auditory
domestic
possible
literature
non-wild
animals
is
3
also
included,
detailed
as
although
it
is not as exhaustive
nor
it would
be if
that were
the mission
the purpose
of
this report
"wildlife"
as
of
tills
report.
For
as those
The
animals
literature
period
which
search
here
from
1950
to the
are
also
reviewed.
studies
not born
reported
present,
thoroughly
available.
Therefore,
only
reports
A detailed
report
source
for information
from
of libraries,
of Noise
To determine
important
_o
(I)
spectra,
in
pertinent
possible
to search
l_mi.ted._m___
relevant
literature
and readily
are
information
and persons
on the
included.
retrieval
and
agencies
contacted
in the Appendix.
noise
does
Animals
_o an organism,
it is
know:
What
What
to noise-induced
recovery
in c_tiv_ty.
concentrated
in the
on Laboratory
what
sounds
intensity,
(2)
foreign
materials,
not
clearly
is presented
Effects
was
It was
literature
obtainable
or hatched
but earlier
the foreign
services,
_
were
is defined
duration,
factors
damage
process,
laboratory
an aniz_%l is exposed
etc.)
experiments
experiments
each
manipulated
to
of
these
de_ermine
and pattern
determine
(e.g.
These
using
factors
age,
are
animals,
can
the relationships
(e.g.,
frequency,
of exposure);
an animal's
species,
parameters
to
susceptibility
audibility
best
r_nge,
investigated
because
in
laboratory
be controlled
between
and
noise
4
exposure
the
and
effects
basic
of
and
Effects
of
with
damage
anin_Is
to
brief
man,
the
moderate
To
of
the
best
the
to
levels
study
hearing
abilities
problem
in
of
loss
it
and
what
of
response
This
to
that
An
is
in
less
ani,_l
can
the
escape
be
punishment
appropriately
depending
on
cue
the
loss
on
or
by
a
exposure
the
obtain
very
used
an
to
heard
that
produce
hungry
responses
the
a sound.
test
hearing
the
stimulus
(e.g.,
or
or
assess
sensitive
shock).
Either
ear-twitch
has
a sound
is
system,
of
reward
A major
animals
capable
to
his
on
auditory
be
electric
(i.e.,
noise.
"hears."
animal
sounds
to
circumstances),
a
are
respond
noise
the
measure
to
reflex,
an
to
to
anim_l
can
not
they
(e.g.,
motivated
from
but
than
trained
a
noise
by prolonged
of
the
that
because
as
of
produced
exposure
Preyer
indicates
intense
be
necessary
animal
The
a reliable,
sound
from
the
ear.
animals,
are
using
is
sound,
reflex
hearing
the
is
sounds
behavioral
of
auditory
hearing
can
or
effects
recordings
sensitivity
of
after
electrophysiologieal
responses
effect
This
sound
auditory
of
the
two
effects.
production
before
determination
on
in
sound.
hearing
studying
classified
effects
documented
loud
investigating
System
system.
very
be
non-auditory
Auditory
is
Experilaents
can
of
the
auditory
exposure
noise
studies
studies
on
animal.
to
(1)
(2)
laboratory
the
exposure
Noise
As
the
on
categories:
system,
to
effects
food)
of
sounds
response.
by
or
to
If
the
animal
fearful
of
shock,
serve
as
can
5
a very
sensitive
thresholds
in animals
"conditioned
avoid
can
by
other.
provide
tones
can
be tested,
hearing
can
response;"
from
If the
animal
the
the animal
of
by using
is
is well-trained,
measure
then
can
trained
a
to
cage
this procedure
of his
An
ability
to detect
animal's
hearing
be exposed
to determine
Auditory
a two-chambered
and intensity.
animal
be retested
is hearing.
determined
one side
sensitive
frequency
he
frequently
moving
a very
of known
of what
are
avoidance
shock
to the
indicator
to
noise,
the decrease
and
in hearing
ability.
Impulse
maximum
of
noise
intensity;
impulse
sound
can
the
by damaging
the
inner
Poehe,
ear.
his_ologic
exposure
to
producing
were
a_art
i;
hair
i
Organ
over
cells
a SPL
a 45-min
were
produced
125
to
the rapid
of tiny
cells
sound.
period.
This
130
other
hundred
in a narrow
exposure
was
comparable
for
4 hr
_ajeau-Chargois,
to
were
ears,
hand
a
in
cochleas
(SPL)
the
ear, or
the
studied
rounds
noises
In II of
damage
dB.
The
the ear-drum,
structures
pigs
produced
middle
(1969)
guinea
the ear.
of a second).
changes
in the
to its
on the order
by rupturing
and Ades
Five
quickly
time,
pressure
sound-pressure-level
destroyed
by
rise
hones
and
very
millionths
the ear
14 young
om from
of Corti.
of
in
average
30
a few
Stockwell,
impulse
an
fired
changes
sensory
rises
a very fast
damage
chain
changes
which
(i.e.,
intense,
by disrupting
•I
it has
a few micro-seconds
If sufficiently
by
is sound
following
of paper
of
caps,
153 dB,
1 to
5-see
the sensory
midway
along
the
to histologic
2,000-Hz
Berlin,
tone
and
at
Whitehouse
6
(1970)
studied
24
guinea
by
testing
from
pigs.
to
exposed
only
at
a
one
rate
of
reported
stated.
the
booms
the
guinea
of
these
to
pigs,
cochleas
revealed
cells
the
of
one
Because
they
are
(peak
duration
spectrum.
very
not
eq_ally
auditory
of
A
useful
different,
nolse
inne r
in
of
in
very
brief
terms
of
and
addition,
description
sensitive
s[stem.
_tend
produced,
each
boom
reference
in
bearing
lO_
of
amazingly
exposed
was
level
was
exposure
to
ability
of
the
1,000
in
their
hair
little
to
either
exposed
examinations
rise
be
all
spectra
High
_o_ produce
time,
the
damage,
booms
and
impulse
maximum
by
fFequ_en_y
man
of
Sounds
described
because
to
durations
duration.
of
information
frequency
w_s
were
of
approximately
was
was
following
changes
This
of
at
second.
level),
can,
reflex
microscopic
animal
the
described
but the
any
turn.
per
booms
dB,
abilities
individually
animal
intensity
ix*
frequencies
durations
The
l_-eyer
detect
each
of
pressure
the
losses
that
rate
130
although
first
considering
the
second.
of
were
(e_ch
1,000
booms
hearing
range
having
durations);
of
a
pigs
booms
approximately
Tests
guinea
sonic
_nimals'
over
milliseconds
per
failed
in
The
simulated
the
reflex
sonic
125.00
one
as
not
Bz.
or
by
determined
Preyer
simulated
4.76,
to
the
16,000
to
produced
They
for
125
2.00,
damage
frequency
spectrum
other
changes
egr,.._hereas_Ibwfrequeneytones,
different
pure
in
a
tones
localized
and
provides
ani|m%is
effects
or
longer
frequency
f;_eg_k_.llcZi_._._ounds
hKve
intensity
having
their
sounds,
with
on
narrow
regions
random
are
or
the
bands
of
the
7
broad-band
noise
tend
to
1965b)
128
to
damage
third
of
Borgo
to
produced
._
this
and
of
250,
there
for
or
was
no
3
hr
at
4,000,
in
less
in
in
the
Contl
a
of
SPL
8,000
Inner
structures
the
the
pigs,
cytochrome
to
sensitive
extensive
or
the
of
a decrease
damage
guinea
enzyme
related
a SPL
recorded
structures
20
different
not
ear
little
the
was
revealed
changes
of
several
was
the
2,000,
metabolic
at
(1965a,
potentials
supporting
exposure
Beaglsy
tone
min,
that
with
activity
in
50
involving
that
reduction
stimulating
and
Hz
ear.
oxldase
of
the
frequency
inner
of
the
noise.
Dogs
by
the
500-Hz
studies
cochlea,
consistent
detectable
ear;
cells
found
in
for
indicating
frequencies
Reduction
to a
tone,
coehlearmierophonic
In studies
(1964)
dB
pigs
t histological
the
turn.
throughout,.the
to pure
exposure
sensory
turn
fourth
guinea
ear,
Also
to
exposure
of
inner
sound.
was
Z9
amplitude
the
i00
of
Following
the
from
study
exposed
dB.
in
a
changes
..........
le_ug-th--of--the_coch_ea,.
In
produce
and
Covell
guinea
(1953)
in
pigs
a study
were
of
used
the
as
experimental
hlstologlc
animals
changes
in
i
the
i
organ
of
Cortl
exposed
132
sound.
Essentially,
in
the
organ
indicative
In
shift
guinea
(a
some
pigs
a
and
Covell
Corti
of
of
following
7
dogs
found
following
loss
of
elevation
to
to
marked
in
studies
of
the
the
of
intense
50,000
exposure
hearing
preliminary
temporary
exposure
to
sound.
He
lO0,090-Hz
histologic
changes
to
sound,
intense
animals.
temporary
level
of
threshold
lowest
intensity
8
sound
that
can
determined
with
be heard)
that
temporary
increased
noise
duration
(2,000-4,000
level
was
Hz)
Benitez,
chinchillas
of exposure
to an
octave
9G dB
(the reference
at 70, 80
experiment
Eldredge,
hr
and Templet
TTS
of about
48 dB in
about
5 days.
Changes
behavioral
recorded
losses
the second
Rothenberg,
TTSs
during
required
threshold
shifts
frequencies.
cells
were
and
(1957)
stimulated
levels,
measured
one
group
less
lost in the
of
__..
_
than
third
and
pigs
at the
pigs
..........
and
been
octave
136
than
band
maximum
Recovery
dB _or
to
turns.
study
noise;
membrane,
from
and hair
Lawrence
white
of
test
cochlear
used
TTSs
of permanent
reduced
system.
with
tympanic
in activity
at certain
second
guinea
to
greater
signs
were
auditory
recovery
mierophonlcs
obtained
with
l0 dB
has also
with
a
a SPL of 100 dB, Miller,
5 days,
the
guinea
an
potentials
noise
to
Using
7 days of exposure.
Cochlear
damage
much
the
centered
produeed
closely
were
(in press)
about
of
Broad-band
loss
noise at
and Eldredge
50 dB or more
exposure
of sensitivity
responses.
Hz) of thermal
of noise
in cochlear
nerve
of
exposed
the animals,
losses
the auditory
in behavioral
This
band
turn corresponded
TI'Ss; however,
from
(300-600
these
of 98 dB.
band
threshold
(1970)
to an octave
increased
to determine
of temporary
behavioral
from
or
In an
a SPL
recorded
.................
(TTS)
at 500 Hz with
requiring
(1965)
shift
correlates
for 48-72
Peters
threshold
not reported).
electrophysiological
shifts,
in chinchillas,
were
a second
hearing
and Yan_is
sound
pressure
150 dB for
group.
I_. _ _._
_-¸
9
Recordings
from
exposure
Both
37
produced
groups.
cats
levels
3,400
across
Hz.
small
as
groups
injury
of four
of noise
initial
threshold
animals
exposed
had losses
a SPL
other
shifts
of
had
of
of 40
a total
sixteen
shift
of 8 hr
threshold
Nelson
noise
(1970)
eight
15-min
of more
than
had
the animals
dB 3 months
Both
after
2 dB.
shift
animals
was
exposures
exposures
I00 dB, but
completely
exposed
exposure.
The
and
also
on hearing.
(i.e.,
of
7 1/2-min
of only
One group
quiet.
intermittently
whereas
loss
for 2 hr to a 700 to
117 dB.
to
less permanent
of permanent
exposed
at a SPL
into
between
and
maximum
exposure
increased;
chinchillas
of 45 min
2 weeks
total
Ward
of
permanent
up the
monaural
the
mean
threshold
0.85.
noise
(for 15 min)
intervals
amounts
and
produced
5.6 dB
intermittent
at
1,700,
of an hour
in increasingly
doses
sound-pressure-
of ll5 dB for one-eighth
of
were
continuously,
!
was
the effects
by intervals
Breaking
24-hr
between
at 850,
in
exposed
equal
to uninterrupted
from
a 20-min
(1963)
nearly
centered
a per,_nent
ear destroyed)
within
ranging
between
having
produced
studied
having
that
in sensitivity
to 8 hr produced
resulted
correlation
band
15 min
interval
cochlear
loss
and Covell
to a SPL
(for S hr).
exposure
doses
hands
Exposure
shifts
doses
the
Hz.
for
threshold
dB
noise
octave
indicated
105 dB for one-fourth
ll5 dB
40.6
Watson,
Exposures
or
window
permanent
Miller,
at 4,000
of
some
to Broad-hand
an hour
TTS
the round
Two
with
one
3,000-Hz
exposed
separated
produced
the
recovered
continuously
I0
Twenty
guinea
engine
noise
groups
of five
the noise
For
the
above
by
animals
closer
position
were
150,
Hz.
Peak
near
llO
in the
50.1
exposure
to the
thresholds
indicated
in the
two closer
groups,
only
slight
measurable
temporary
effect
Ishii,
in the
Takahashi,
and
for 30 min
to white
produced
reductions
in
an
pigs'
energy
source
The
the
system
depends
and
interpolated
the
amount
at
complete
to 57
days
the fourth
Hz
noise,
and
dropped
5 min,
Preyer
loss
of
hearing
post-exposure;
in the third
distant
were
140 dB
Following
almost
there
group
and
(]969)
noise
at a 8PL
reported
of
of glycogen
that
that
fig dB
granules
glycogen
Effects
Only
recently
as
cells.
upon
individual
in exposure
hearing
intensity,
loss
or damage
spectrum,
susceptibility.
periods
can
non-auditory
effects
Rest
significantly
of
to
duration,
of Noise
have
in
serves
of damage.
Non-auditory
no
group.
Balogh
suggested
the hair
near
levels
engine
of noise-induced
of exposure
intervals
reduce
in
from
ft respectively.
peaks
rocket
the number
They
extent
auditory
pattern
ears.
at distances
16 and 31.5
losses
exposure
guinea
with
pressure
most
Four
sound-pressure-levels
Hz,
up
booster
(1970).
5,000
frequencies.
reflex
were
and
dB between
higher
Istre
located
S00,
positions,
to rocket
and
were
8,000
off rapidly
see of
each
8 to
8 and 31.5
exposed
Miller,
of 75,
ii0 dB from
between
wore
Gonzalez,
source
three
pigs
noise
II
sthatnoise
pain,
et_._here
concerning
also
evidence
changes.
activation
glucose,
in
exposure
resources
and
under
mildly
to noise
may
induce
of
glands.
conditions
in
stress
of _he physiologic
a variety
blood
pressure,
is evidence
can exhaust
that protect
situations.
about
On the other
to disease
includes
corticosteroids,
There
that
an organism's
hand,
de_th
of
and
an animal
it from stress
or even
is
similar
to stress
bringing
in death.
susceptible
now there
of response
levels
literRture
and
as increases
to severe
result
stressful
an animal
blood
the adrenal
prolonged
extremely
such
of
to stress
exposure
endocrine
changes,
available
raised
that
pattern
measurable
body
response
The general
and
changes
a considerable
physlologlc
some
neural
is
becomes
under
even
Theater
responses
to stress
is
not
un_._e_
In an early
:
McCamn
i
sound
i
(1948)
noise
exposed
of a blast
a week,
_or
exposed
i
tO 154 mm Hg
i
from
a
80 dB
rats
in the
124 to 127 mm
noise for
Yeakel,
Shenkin,
adrenalectomized
of compressed
year.
Bom%shevskaya,
_}
study,
The
rose
last
Hg.
average
from
More
times
Norway
an initial
from
of
control
were
to the
in
the
i13 mmHg
values
(0slnstseva,
rats
and
5 days
pressure
value
while
recently
1969),
rats
5 min a day,
systolic
2 months,
and Kaverina,
various
air
Rothballer,
Pushkina,
exposed
18 to 126 days.
rose
to an
Following
12
exposure
to
noise,
ascorbic
acid
rats
relative
been
studied
Ackerman
They
dB
SPL,
132
dB
SPL.
of
noise
with
evidenced
mouse
and
by
straills
Ackerm_n,
subjected
two
SPL,
or
off
throughout
min
on
period.
Although
as
and
a
such
span.
can
frequency
an
concluded
dB
than
low
noise-induced
to
b%
Wistar
albino
in
circulating
and
could
transient.
on
decrease
'that rats,
noise,
in
They
also
but
frequency
conjunction
noted
that
female
}Iz)
noise
seizures
and
mice,
that
2,000-40,000
selzure-resistant
Weltman,
a
of
occurs
SPL,
in
Jurtshuk,
of
(IS2
12 weeks,
changes
food,
to
situations.
stressful
considered
groups
The
it
a single
superimposed
of
Hz
indications
slight
noise
adapt
to
number
restriction
if
up
cellular
generally
authors
included
obtained
the
intense
noise
increase
1957).
were
effects
stressful
more
in
successfully
damagin_
by
decrease
that
as
they
measured
changes
however,
periods
at
2,GO0-40,000
min
additional
be
dB
Hz
10O
have
to
Ii0
150-4800
and
i00
pigs
appears
at
Lloyd
to
for
life
high
noise:
pigs
day
stress,
intense
guinea
and
and
per
find,
can
and
intense
HZ
Aekerman,
min
these
guinea
mice,
these
has
by Anthony
45
min
activation,
anim_l's
Anthony,
rats,
of
rodents
or
eoslnophils,
and
by
in
activation
15
glands
an
in
of
stimulation
adrenal
another
adrenals
of
exposure
did
the
drops
Durations
of
adrenal
They
and
bands
of
Adreno-eortical
extensively
exposed
significant
weights
10,00O-20,00O
cycles
the
and
1957)
exposure,
4-week
revealed
controls.
broad
140
and
to
quite
relatively
6-min
contents
(1955,
(1959).
analyses
as
in
(Anthony
Sackler
rats
(1959)
daily
to
at
13
1 min
of
days,
respectively.
I00
noise
(++5) dB
response
upon
higher
adrenal
of
(15-270
min,
to
29-96
SPL
every
hour.
serum
cholesterol
the
brain.
transitury
20
exposures
but
by
to
80-87
trial
20
the
dogs
120
Hz
locomotor
also
rats
had
physiologic
stress
stimulus
was
presented
6
counts,
increased
(1966)
stated
levels
in
blood
he
did
reactions
in
trials
5-I0
min.
the
measures
were
had
apparently
of
levels
dogs
handling,
for
min
acid
that
the
a
raised
ascorblc
noise
lower
Geber,
acoustic
sound
had
and
the
The
15
at
greatest
values
eoslnophil
dB
for
controls.
of
25,000-Hz
glycemic
reactlvitles,
acid
their
glycemic
in
the
days).
experimenter
increase
individual
E1
Treptow
in
of
investigated
and
Although
to
did
lower
levels
used
predictable
of
noted
noise
Stimulated
durations
to
increases
becoming
out
20,000
They
than
and
Of
stimulation
ascorbic
(1966)
hr,
min
auditory
and
three
5
consisted
levels.
Dyne
to
to
displayed
of
levels
rats
93-dB
that
weights
Van
and
noise
glutathlone
and
response
to
RaTs
glutathlone
Anderson,
in
The
cessation
blood
73
ii days
SPL.
lowest
blood
for
had
prior
find
highly
a
1 and
Due
to
variable,
adapted
to
the
noise
stimulus.
Biochemical
by
'
Elbowicz-lVarlewska
i month
[!:
to
daily
with
frequencies
acid
dehydrogenase
blood
i
changes
were
(1962).
45-min
from
observed.
due
to
activity
Hrubes
noise
Guinea
periods
i00
to
of
50,000
and
pigs
noise
}_.
pyruvlc
(1964)
exposure
found
were
were
at
160
exposed
_5)
Increases
acld
levels
that
dB
in
in
studied
for
SPL
lactic
the
non-esterifled
8
14
fatty
acids,
transport
white
the
within
rats
generator
noise
for
1G hr.
that
acids
decreases.
noise
of
1 sec
at random
Thirty
rats
and 24
rabbits
received
were
exposed
higher
groups
however,
to noise
at
plasma
after
differences
between
deposits
experimental
the end of weeks
and
rabbits,
in the
plus
more
increased
suprarenal
lipid
metabolism.
24 hr
a day
wave
with
a
to
interval
stimuli
of 3 min.
for 3 weeks
These
animals
administered
to handle
excess
triglycerides
were
the second
week;
during
experimental
and
1 and 3.
In the
fasting
weight
programmed
but were
of auditory
sound-stressed
of fat
dB was
Plasma
between
4 weeks
square
abilities
only
95 dB
demonstrated
with
l0 weeks.
stress.
cholesterol
were higher
included
their
no differences
of rats
for
rats
(1967)
presented
noise
and water,
test
to
characteristic
an average
to the
in sound-exposed
there were
wlth
exposed
(1965)
increased
interfere
114
female
transmitter
repeatedly
Brown
and a SPL of
diets
to
and
200 Hz
e_osed
Benes
showed
intermittent
were
oils
and
and
102 dB was
intervals,
standard
additional
animals
of
in
eatecholamines,
plasma,
can
in active
to a 95 dB
subjected
Byers,
at a SPL
exposed
uremic
stimulation
additional
duration
while
exposed
implicated
significantly
Hrubes
rats
blood
Friedman,
that auditory
occur
white
in
most
were
increased
Further,
and an
increased
rats
free fatty
White
cells,
the
developed
size.
lipid
when
demonstrated
noise
plasma
plasma
control
rabbits,
triglyoerides
stimulation.
rabbits
and
fat
Additional
their
irises
of the
eyes
of
aortic
atherosclerosis
controls
the
and
15
higher
cholesterol
concluded
that
exogenously
by
produces
is
its
interactions
the
that
from
Lockett
S
50-200
at
l-min
•
Hz
wlth
2
min
and
analyzed
3
to
at
98-100
that
out
every
every
for
had
physeal
lesions.
produced
in
urine
in
20
150
for
45
min.
among
concluded
which
sodium
the
the
pars
They
of
two
compared
I00
dB
Was
Responses
to
that
noise
were
had
neurohypo-
that
thunderclaps
tone
hypothalamus
these
a recent
did
not
resulting
hormones
excretion
with
Ohta,
Itoh,
flow.
study
(Hiroshige,
Sato,
and
this
collected
that
150-Hz
claps
presented
i:
In
and
range
Urine
potassium
for
0gle
a rate
I_z at
vasopressin;
and
the
He
recorded
animals
and
day)
frequency
min.
of
affected
and
a
tone
kidneys
responses
of
at
potassium.
authors
oxytocin
increases
no increase
min
and
Thunderclaps
of
pure
for
per
(1959)
rat.
cortex,
rats
with
the
in
adrenal
in
eon_arlsons
The
hypertrophy
the
Werner
of
(8 hr
presented
5 min
denervated
emotional
in excretion
SPL,
15
sodium
through
that
produce.
a
from
of
intact,
in
duration
dB
those
stimulation
hypophysis
effect
4-sec
to
system.
ringing
in
the
of
analyzed
produced
'_
studied
handling
eortioo-hypothalamic
the
bell
resulted
sound
adrenal
on
hyperactivity
intervals
for
were
weeks
and
(1966)
of
effect
hypophyseal
continuous
in
similar
that
via
sound
authors
changes
effects
evidence
with
of
The
stimulation.
effects
effect
thunderclaps
having
hypothalamlc
the
aortas.
produces
observed
to
intermedla
their
stress
additional
long,
i day
in
fat,
chronic
There
found
auditory
delivered
produced
studied
content
16
1969),
rats
and noise
were
level were
an increase
factor
exposed
to bell-ringing
not
reported).
in the activity
(CRF)
and
ACTH
from
in
the adrenals.
(1969)
reported
in weights
rats,
exposed
with
sound
pituitaries
and
characteristics
Activity
every
and
of acetyleholine
(1968).
reported)
2 hr a day
produced
and
an
followed
for
gradual
initial
reference
by a decrease
increases
glands
in healthy
audicgenic-
The
rats
already
were
time,
frequency
levels
were
the rat
to noise
not reported.
brain
(type
was
and
studied
level
not
12, or 15 days
acetylcholine
a slow
rats
for 1.5 min each
in aeetylcholine
with
and Khaunlna
The
for 3, 6, 9,
in
release
produced
adrenals.
Exposure
increase
pituitary,
the
sound-sensitive
l0 times,
increases
from
adrenal
throughout
by Brzezinska
the
lh.akh'e,
3 to 4 days.
noise
produces
sound-sensitive,
The
to a 105 dB sound
one exposure
and
of
rats.
produced
of corticosteroids
stimulation
in a strain
susceptible
enlarged
the release
the pituitary
but not
seizure
had
of
(ACTH)
Monastyrskaya,
that
Bell-ringlng
CRF
hormone
turn produces
(spectrum
of corticotropin-releasing
In the hypothalamus.
of adrenocortlcotrophic
for 2 min
esterase
activity,
concentration
return
to normal
levels
by 15 exposures.
In addition
reproductive
glands
exposure
to noise.
however.
Anthony
results
in a study
of sexually
to the pituitary
mature
and functions
The
results
guinea
adrenal
also
not
(1959)
the effects
male
are
are
and Harclerode
of
and
affected
always
By
negative
on sexual
Twelve
the
consistent,
reported
of noise
pigs.
glands,
weeks
scores
of daily
17
exposure,
at
a
for
SPL
did
of
not
to
activation
limits
bell.
of
first
controls.
however,
1-21
level
and
spectrum
the
the
effect
of
mature
rabbits
rang
1 min
and
"near"
out
of
of
to
sound
the
sound
partial
cells
of
also
were
and
on
3,100
and
electric
bell
every
i0
24
min,
electric
not
reported.
blockage
that
(1964)
of
25
by
in
per
hypertrophy
examined
rats.
em
and
the
function
mature
hr
mice
teratocytes,
genit_l
an
male
an
characterized
stimulation
animals
revealed
observed
Isachar
young
38
were
epithelium,
Hz
tolerance
of
mice
He
4,800
eortico-adrenal
that
exposed
the
to
noise
experimental
(1959)
formation
Zondek
acoustic
the
to
300
evidence
of
epithelium.
hyperplasla.
of
sound-exposed
seminal
interstitial
housed
days
of
period,
suggesting
Zoric
testes
min
of
Some
spermatocytes,
of
were
scores
for
of
glandular
and
sexual
30
frequencies
day
order
atrophy
each
with
found,
the
involution
of
approached.
per
The
Studies
the
was
hr
out
dB
their
were
8
min
139-144
affect
relative
for
20
the
in
The
48
animals
diameter
day,
for
9
that
days
}
[_
prior
i
energy
i_
Auditory
to
at
mating.
4,000
i
estrus,
female
rats
in
female
rabbits
in
males
copulatory
ii
gestation
of
and
either
period
such
peak
and
SPL
in
follicle
in
type.
induced
stress
1O0
peak
dB,
of
enlargement
Effects
female
rats
Auditory
increased
produced
a
with
95
dB
of
the
haematomata,
rabbits.
than
was
another
resulted
in
i
)
Hz,
stress
persistent
i
The
and
maximum
at
i0,000
Hz.
ovaries,
other
effects
were
more
pronounced
and
were
hardly
stress
during
fertility,
blockage
visible
the
hut
during
of pregnancy.
18
However,
well
Zondek
as
ability
70-80_
the
was reduced
to ll_ as compared
rats.
plug),
_natomical
behavior
changes
auditory
vaginal
the stress
was
studied
exposed
They
estrus
in
to be
of a
of
process.
In similar
the effects
of auditory
74 adult
female
by a 2,000-Hz
found
after
continued,
produced
nor any noticeable
stimulation
150 days.
males'
in the weights
in the spermatogenic
They
as
to
by the presence
no changes
(1970)
The
were
did not seem
vesicles,
and Rao
up to
decreased.
effects
was verified
on rat ovaries.
that
tone
at
31 animals
i0 consecutive
more
rats
and more
developed
days
animals
100
of stress.
demonstrated
condition.
There
lasting
is
evidence
changes
at
least
be
susceptible
in strains
in mice
exposed
of mice
from a bell
susceptibility
that
have
The
described).
Thompson
and Sontag
(1956)
seizures
in pregnant
rats
been
seizures.
attached
to seizure
stimulation
and even
and audiogenic
to noise.
SPL were not
sound
animals
to audlogenic
emotlonallty
the sound
that
in exposed
studied
and
Sexual
seminal
Singh
persistent
the
comparable
and there were
and
to continuous
As
males;
(copulation
dB C for
the males'
to fertilize
testes
stress
in rats
were
female
fashion,
that
fertilities
in control
vaginal
reported
the females'
inhibited
the
(1964)
in their
Lindzey
He reported
offspring,
bred
(1951)
susceptibility
were
to a metal
induce
specially
seizure
animals
may
stimulated
washtub
by
(spectrum
increased
in certain
strains
of mice.
described
effects
of audlogenic
on
maze-learning
abilities
of
to
i
!
19
their
offspring.
Each
one
experimental
and
day
were
from
of
induced
pregnancy
Within
24
hr
selected
mothers
in
of
birth
the
group
kept
three
mothers
so
each
that
each
of
housed
in
the
Training
in
there
were
sizes,
or
between
Pups
a
mothers
had
mothers.
exposed
control
Isbil
to
90,
and
lO0,
day
from
the
had
more
malformed
embryos
than
that
had
eleventh
did
trials
pups
at
60
at
80
days
of
in
body
were
ll0
unexposed
in
days
pups
the
more
mice°
fourteenth
young
that
noise
Although
litter
differences
learning.
during
to
controls
on
experimental
female
mice
for
6 hr
day
of
still-born,
Teratogenie
age.
required
born
found
white
of
weights,
maze
and
21
and
age.
cross-fostered
phon.
At
General
seizures
errors
(1960)
through
young,
groups
did
were
significant
audiogenlc
than
Yokobori
or
and
more
groups
mothers
30
control
control
versa.
the
Three
other
mothers
room°
were
were
the
the
animal
there
significantly
more
the
began
pups
of
vice
differences
and
day
between
from
the
at
significant
significantly
i£
maze
eighteenth
in
pups
and
removed
tested
experimental
pregnancy
even
were
three
(seizure)
in
per
removed.
switched
mothers
cages
levels,
to
the
to
females.
were
and
bred
seizures
female
rest
were
were
activity
born
the
while
group
pups
water
no
pups,
the
two
group
control
individual
levels
and
was
Two
experimental
experimental
on
activity
six
and
rats
through
male
litter
each
from
age,
the
albino
female.
fifth
two
own
in
cross-fostered
days
the
of
male
control
experimental
their
pups
six
one
in
from
of
and
effects
per
pregnancy
smaller
produced
20
by
audiogenie
Kaye
stress
(1970).
320-580
60-75%
were
timed
of each
hour.
5-hr
plug
A motorcycle
Hz was
placed
least
were also
was
periods
were
as
producing
to deliver
in the chamber
used
effects
horn
Female
noise
albino
mice
stages
8 hr
17 of pregnancy.
In these
cases,
40_
resorbsd
fetal weight
in control
noise
levels
stimulation
days
were
used,
occurred
7-8 resulted
teratogenic
and
litters
tail
defects)
of stress
effects
effects
from
the
flow
were
perhaps
has
shown
delayed
there
susceptible
to be
strains
used
an
800-Hz
3 hr
each
Mice
innoculated
tone
day on
of
of mice.
with
6-8 week
an
At
between
Jensen
intensity
with
if
hind
These
limbs,
effects
stress
and
and placental
for
during
Observed
fetal
steroids
blood
hypoxia,
least
one experiment
noise
exposure
in audlogenie
old Swiss
intranasally
moderate
18.
eatecholamines
uterine
infection
only
Stress
dwarfed
the fetus.
were
fetal
results
day
8 to
mean
to endocrinologic
implantation.
to viral
by
responsible
is a relation
Although
at
severe
litters
periods.
hematoma,
and/or
Decreased
considered
susceptibility
severe
in discharge
adrenals.
and
were
attributed
on the mother
resulted
there
(cranial
for
on days
g while
g.
strain)
(vaginal
most
day
of the
1.45
100_ resorbtion
were
per
0.44
critical
noise
The
was
during
in
was
for
(Swiss-Webster
pregnancy).
of 120-123
vesicular
BRVS
and
seizure
and Rasmussen
Webster
and
dB SPL at
of pregnancy
stress
and mean
Barletta,
82-85
to the
with
weight
obtained
of
Ward,
intermittently
and exposed
at different
indicant
by
reported
(1970)
dB
for
mice.
stomatitis
21
virus
to
just
the
were
before
exposure
infection,
more
while
resistent.
susceptible
to
controls
that
the
progression
and
interferon
also
found
each
day
polyom_
the
they
as
change
in
of ad/'enal
function.
noise
have
hemorrhages
in
exposed
dogs
to
155
to
hemorrhages
_
125
dB.
_+
of hemorrhages,
""
Emphysematous
had
been
No{se
in laboratory
after
in
noise
not
sec
the
in
60
postexposure,
to
This
be
audiogenic-seizure
of
Frolov
of
in
in
the
noise
mm
noise
at
diameter
levels
exceeded
increased
numbers
size
exposure
even
Barer,
(1969)
white
3
if
noise
effects
Kidryavtseva,
and
bursts
independent
noise-induced
Tysik,
increases
by
susceptible
in
resulted
induced
as
subjects.
found
reports
They
within
undesirable
lungs,
changes
days
just
exposure,
levels
sound.
to
Nosokin,
3.5
hours
but
at
to
found
Increased
detectable
blood
Morozova,
Two
were
addition
study
or
was
Ponomar'kov,
0.6-
dB.
periods
had
than
inflammatory
mice
control
demonstrated
dogs.
Leshchenko,
105
In
The
more
suppressed
by
less
non-stressed
a recent
Kostin,
more,
tumors
impaired
susceptibility
been
mice,
be
also
sound
lukemia.
also
exposure
were
more
The
stressed
might
transitory
susceptible
were
the
mice
developed
virus
susceptible
after
sound-stressed.
sound
more
stressed
and
Rauseher
challenge
that
sound
responses
that
were
innoculated
virus
not
of
sound
mice
The
were
when
to viral
to
though
of
each
were
spot.
still
hemorrhaged
resorbed.
has
also
anio_Is.
Been
demonstrated
_onaenkov
to
(1058)
disrupt
behavior
reported
that
electric
bells
rats
i:>
exposed
for
7 days
to sounds
produced
by
(for
22
45
min
to 2 hr
refused
per
to eat,
stated
that
weakened
and
white
for
were
randomly
assigned
mothers.
Half
cages
female
four
animals
an
and
in each
21 days.
were
At
field
of the
adrenal
litters
weighed
less
raised
in soundproof
in
straight
the
Decreased
rate
After
and had
in the
increases
were
After
were
learned
open
field
raised
test
at the
end
at 56 days
relative
in
glands.
(bad
in
electric
Rats
faster
an
activity
tests,
adrenal
did rats
for
(42 days)
repeated
measured.
larger
placed,
runway
these
and
21 days
following
in a straight
gland
than
period
own
raised
I0 male
spontaneous
measures
boxes
runway
activity
weights,
57 days.
weights
were
room
of this
their
in regular
animal
latency
at
raised
in the common
heart
body-weights
were
and
the end
sound
were
were
weaned
test,
Open
than
size
groups.
rats
then
were
of body
20 trials.
pups
other
There
roar
the rats
made
and response
two different
litter
half
room.
were
80 albino
The rat
in each
of the
to a cage,
by raising
females
animal
displayed
3 or 13 animals
the other
conditions,
open-field
shock,
of
boxes;
pups
these
measures
rat pups
in a noisy
under
additional
of either
(1960)
to normal.
(1965).
to lactating
the
sound-proof
wire
i0
litters
noise
and under
by Groh
active,
days of rest
to return
sizes
less
Borisova
Five
produced
litter
and
to 85-dB
reflexes.
reported
into
exposed
effects
two different
divided
in
rats
untidy
aggressive.
the reflexes
Permanent
levels
became
became
conditioned
necessary
in
day)
lower
large
Rats
latencies)
in the animal
and
increased
room.
heart
23
rate
responses
were
more
pronounced
litters
in soundproof
boxes
litters
in
room
groups.
all
tile animal
With
these
the
and
morphological
in those
than
possible
in rats
were
raised
raised
those
exception
in s._ll
in the other
of the
and behavioral
in large
cardiac
changes
two
response,
appeared
to
be stable.
There
cited
above
The SPLs
h_h
are
bave
sufficiently
rather
high
than
at all.
mostly
those
and
short
which
perhaps
would
cited
dB and with
merit
which
of
of the studies
general
would
be
exposure
would
intensity
is that
That
however,
hardly
for relatively
stimulation
100
high
150 days.
exposure;
most
as high
few below
from
"acute"
m-a2/be no relationship
next
as
90
acute
there
cited
he considered
longest
exposure
a chronic
organisms.
160 dB with
dB.
to "chronic"
in non-audltory
probably
as
cases
studies
short-llved
were
as
as
level
should
qualify
described
be typified
duration
the
comment.
in most
A danger, in generalizing
exposure
chronic
which
it
longest
was
days,
that
of stimulation
The
which
the duration
chronic.
effects
of
and
or relatively
low levels
factors
in common
used were
or intense,
was
several
was 42
exposure
The
most
a
except
le-_0/__.gf
....
in excess
T h_-qg._2_ielevels
m_uch
beeVgmd--wha-t--we-,.wo
u-ld-..nor
ma-l_y--f_i.nd-_nlmmls._
expos ecL-.t
o _r.oV_nd
a_rfle_Id_
industries,
into
habitat.
their
o_.._o.._tudJ-tomy_rlamag_
by man
highways,
It would_seem
t° _I_1_
i_nto the anin_tls'
endo_ologlcal-.damag_
or
world.
other
intrusions
by man
lo__g_i__l_tQ__e_t_.t___e
@_D_a__1_heu_tl_l_invasio_.ns
0/Ja__l
resul_t
however,
or
the evidence
:!
24
four such
damage
elaboration.
is.at_best-eonf_liating_amd
I.t _y_u!d __appear _t.hat e__xper
i_;_.rkt
S_t 0__de__ermi ne
the_.effects
of
long__t_er.__._r_p_0.93/er___lawer__s_und._leygls
---ha.vD__DQ___heen-pezformed..
effects,
it is unlikely
for moderate
laboratory
ascorbic
i_u n.eed__of
that
durations
animals
acid
would
etc.
widely
respect
lower
to non-auditory
levels
produce
in sexual
levels,
of hea_ing.._ari.es
With
of
stimulation
observable
function,
cholesterol
Another_important
from
changes
organism
in
or
fact
which
to organi_m_
Thls
migkt-,be,..expeoted-.to.be.a.signilicant-lac_oz-,in-s_tud£es
de te1_mlne_.-th_-,,effeots_.o_,
sound..on-_the_organism.
nor is
there
any
evidence
In sumnu%ry,
stimulation
chemistry,
etc.
Extreme
lower
results
and
auditory
caution
obtained
durations
levels
for
Although
of economic
of
noise
seizure
to ether
factor.
levels
produced
on sexual
results
function,
in generalizing
stimulated
animals
of
susceptibility,
however,
animals
Li_t_le or
this
high
have
be used,
these
used,
at the
stimulated
at
durations.
of Noise
some
durations
function,
should
on
about
animals
effects
different
Effects
animals
short
of significant
blood
levels
laboratory
for fairly
suggestive
from
in
of concern
to
studies
on Farm
have
importance,
Animals
been
conducted
experimental
on domestic
controls
and
25
adequate
response
measurement
Since
criteria
have
and
no
recording
of sound
it is difficult
one
of domestic
type
of Noise
Swine
120-135
when
noise
levels
Campbell
exposed
(1963)
noise
monitored
increased
decreased
but had
still
employe_
were
that
the
responses
effects
effects
although
frequencies
trials
found
to these
of noise
on
in other
anatomy
group
sound
or the
exposed
of
organ
of
to ambient
(Bond,
Winchester,
1963).
u_de
extensive
acoustic
repeated
four,
telemetric
30 sec
after
not returned
between
on the effects
stress
eight,
from
consisting
or more
normal
cessation
heart
and 600 Hz.
no differences
in reactions
200 to
120 dB,
a recording
elicited
the same
response.
nursing
sow rising
to her
5,000
of a squeal
of
The
feet
to
Hz
level.
a baby
reaction
of nursing
noted
pig at
for
Heart
stress
also
found
sows
to
at i00 to
I00 dB
consisted
and searching
naive
Frequencies
(1970)
were
heart
rate.
of the sound
Bond
of
of 15 see
times,
attached
to pre-exposure
300
from
tests
equipment
significantly
ranging
aircraft
an airfield
During
by
of
to gross
to a control
of 70 dB from
swine.
130 dB
rate
no injury
and Webb,
on
swine
with
to five
compared
Bond
rate
animal
as far as measurement
animal
to compare
lacking.
on Mammals
dB showed
Corti
of
and
been
animals.
Effects
noise
have
established
stimuli
stimuli,
domestic
i
been
techniques
of the
the sound
26
source
followed
of
dam,
the
typically
(Bond,
and
reacted
birth
to
6 PM
Bond
(1963)
sounds
to 6 PM
to
and
found
from
weight,
the sounds
of
with
the physiology
cites
and
Bugard,
on
young,
93
dB noise
"alarm
signals"
within
with
3 miles
13% of
135
differences
feed
intake,
farm-raised
in
reference
(1960)
,_le
pigs)
days
severe
more
Bugard
retention
from
than
pigs
of eight
air force
within
bases
from
at 200
pigs
feed
utilization
unexposed
literature
(1960)
on
Bond
of noise
found
that
specified)
resulted
and sodium
stated
house
produced
sounds.
using
end
in
that
slaughter
that
of the
6 An!
from
of water
reported
i mile
propeller
slaughter
not
from
weaning.
animals,
mechanically
(1960)
until
the
in the
at
120 dB
to effects
He further
and Bayley
the herds
of
(frequency
pigs.
recorded
review
piglets
dB daily
until
in
to the
of
to jet and
of
male
the pigs
to
heavier
behavior
and
castrated,
no
(frequency
indifferent
partuition
or before,
investigator
reactions
to sound
120 to
absence
above
same
negligible
1970
for several
young,
at
cited
sounds
(In his
castrated,
Parker
exposed
showed
et al.
in aldosteronlsm
disturbed
pigs
regard
gain.
loud
exposed
before
in the
The
included
days
time
as
appeared
sows
reproduced
weaning
body
rate
that
to
caused
on partuition
for three
sounds
exposure
from
pigs
together.
and boars
a weaning
6 AM
aircraft
that
Sows
Effects
and
pounds
by huddling
not specified)
swine.
Baby
to the same
found
intensity
sounds.
indifference.
exposed
1970)
mating
by
milk
cow herds
jet aircraft,
of an
active
27
runway,
showed
compared
to
no
herds
No differences
the end
of the
conducted
exposed
even
been
sonic
than
have adapted
all,
due
Bond
effects
exposed
to exploding
were
present.
70_ of
Oda
milking
(1960)
a decrease
growth
cattle
to
per sq _t.
period.
on man and
did
milk
Milk
In fact,
Force
had
during
daily,
the
Therefore,
testing
cattle
began.
behavioral
Base
been
years.
used
testing
bags
not give
of the
The
may
investigators
reactions
in large
literature
on sound
animals,
every
production
that
19
found
out
of
production
Bond
the sound
motorboat
noted
Bond
noise
However,
by motorboat
104
was
unaffected
that
reactions
cites
produced
and
heifer
(1956)
in dairy
booms
of
during
to
2 min
stimuli
also
Bond
reaction
sonic
for
cows
stimulation,
also
calf
noise.
a mild
that
the sound
occurred.
production.
stated
few seconds
milk while
min following
observers
only
heard
studies
used
several
the booms
lower
paper
stated
in milk
that
of
to
booms.
was unaffected
repor'_ed
beef
who
the animals
the cows
Thirty
normal
Air
in his review
stimuli
during
at Edwards
a day for
close
removed.
cows
few abnormal
(195G)
farther
aircraft
herds
tbat
the actual
to sonic
between
reported
that
when
to the
(1966)
booms
those
before
over
found
of milk
in
production
not exposed
those
Lehmann
the intensity
was higher
animals
and
biased
to 4-8
though
found,
and
in milk
were
were
runway
on herds
may have
_.
which
noise.
Casady
•
differences
also
i
and
2.6-0.75
the
i
lb
test
low subsonic
i
i
28
aircraft
noise
•to sonic
booms.
in response
moving
flying
objects.
This
more
the
object.
of
Noise
white
subjected
120
dB)
or
occurred.
consisted
noises,
was
of
and
present
each
day
were
no
were
of
from
eight
out
may
observed
or
indicate
the
that
other
that
animal
of
after
conditions
dB),
"fright"
sees
rather
20
then
and
sound
min
effects
boxes
airfield
aircraft.
from
third
of eggs
(over
incubation
jet
every
hatchability
laying
background
and
8 AM
eggs
adverse
the
recorded
fertilized
of
no
inside
every
to
when
days
propeller
8 PM
on
8 AM
Sound
to
night.
or
on
8 DM
There
the
quality
hatched.
New
observed
for
groups.
Broodiness
the
70
playbacks
Eighteen
and
(under
produced
effects
of chicks
1-7
sound
from
were
persons,
when
under
noise
and
reactions
reactions
strange
found
held
sound
The
same
were
Poultry
incubation
no
than
observation
(1958a)
hens
to
the
strongly
on
Stadelman
from
pronounced
paper,
occur
hears
Eifects
more
Further,
to
reactions
than
were
broodiness
onset
the sound
eggs
each.
eggs
each
Hampshire
of
levels
Hens
but
were
for
is
egg
3
not
One
above
other
exposed
and
asthe
incubation.
the
Plymouth
days
defined
mentioned
in
and
to
then
hens
divided
were
into
cessation
of
group
exposed
while
group
Hock
incubating
were
sound.
was
given
In
egg
two
laying
to
12 hatching
12
the
hatching
group
not
29
exposed
to
sound,
all
eggs
exposed
to
sound,
all
except
within
2 hr.
broody,
The
hatched
(Stadelman,
from
for
at
old
min from
meat
the chicks
that
the presence
non
chicks
more
adaptable
raised
under
natural
1958b)
to the
same
noise
chicks
were
on a
were
were
not exposed
days
old.
with
a 3 day
reached
gain
she remained
eggs
night
chicks
gain,
or mortality
It was,
the noise
were
could
were
feeding
between
however,
observed
have
noted
and
rendered
situations
2,400
until
for
by the same
crossbred
as
sound
schedule.
they
were
5 out
than
_he
chicks
old.
efficiency
The
20
until
above
was
was
chicks
above.
again
to equipment
There
investigator
31 days
of every
schedule
due
meat
described
to the noise
IG weeks
until
daily
conditions.
different
break
or feeding
to
third
in weight
chicks.
aircraft
Hz played
every
of brooding
to changing
levels
exposed
The
exposed
recorded
to 600
or yield,
experiment
(Stadelman,
they
onset
of the observers
In another
,_
brooding
that
in no difference
subjected
to sound
reported
8 PM to 8 AM
tenderness
and
that
exposed
group
fro,* 12 fertilized
dB at 300
from
resulted
exposed
also
80 to I15
to 8 PM and
efficiency,
sound
stopped
hen, although
one chick
(1958a)
5 out of 2G
9 weeks
In the
1958a).
noise
8 AM
hatched.
one hen
exceptional
only
Stadelman
flyover
were
were
However,
chicks
old,
min
were
the
not
at which
for 4 hr.
they
then
failure,
reached
time
Chicks
45
reinltiated,
until
no difference
in chicks which
exposed
were
they
in weight
or were
not
30
exposed.
One
initiated
at
cage
from
away
less.
The
flyover,
chick
was
31 days
the
investigators
the
sound
the
other;
away
from
the
sound
to
135 dB
sound
for 4 min
broodiness
egg
laying
production
with
of
laying
(Jeannoutot
and
chicks
rate
were
of
peeps
the
per
chicks
sec were
less
than
in
(Vince,
one
would
20 dB
an actual
end of the
be no running
laying
was
turkeys
planes
at
showed
of
of
to resumption
of
interrupted
by
In addition,
a reduction
laying
ll0
This
in a period
progesterone.
whereas
no decrease
following
sound
in egg
the
in egg
sound
laying
stimulation
1961).
exposed
to
artificial
emitted
"peeps"
By bobwhite
down
as a function
the peeps
were
emitted.
3 peeps
in causing
per see
did not
eggs
which
quail
or slowed
instrumental
1966).
jet
in a cessation
of egg
actually
up
bronze
of broodiness.
prior
produced
resun_d
at which
whereas
eggs
hens
"peeps"
speed
day
broodiness
such as
Adams,
speeded
was
during
at
low flying
of egg
resumption
was
Embryonic
mimicked
of
progesterone
broody
that
was
of the
level
breasted
the third
whose
during
treatment
egg
bread
time period
of hormones
injected
when
in
the
in hens
injections
hens
broody
'typically resulted
than
end
the sound
there
noise
source.
and a resumption
shorter
when
to the
not he louder
to recordings
treatment
time
where
therefore,
Seventy-eight
exposed
ran
hypothesized
would
than
to death
and chicks
speaker
pens
were
trampled
of
Three
the
or
more
to hatch
increase
hatchabillty
31
Daily
per
sq
ft
chicken
sonic
had
eggs
no
booms
with
adverse
exposed
for
SPLs
of
0.75
effects
on
21
during
days
the
to
1.25
ib
hatchability
of
incubation
(Bell,
1970).
One
sonic
hundred
booms
with
decreasing
to
0.5
per
sq
A
mean
gradient.
sizes
peak
from
ib
of
boomed
mink.
apparently
curious
other
died
could
be
Bond,
1968).
response
mink
ft
in
the
back
boom
of
whelping.
6
sonic
of
Few
:
of
noise
_i
specific
!
and
on
in
panic
data
are
wildlife
of
than
in
a
used.
which
of
or
observed
(Bell,
1970).
what
noise
no
or
or
any
on Wildlife
regarding
of
and
to
kits,
kits
much
kits
Minear,
toward
Noise
squealing,
disorders
reference
birth
some
of
behavior
of
in
Autopsies
little
with
Litter
to
racing,
Richardson,
showed
shed
smooth
horn
no
no
days
the
resulted
observed.
i0
in
was
those
boom
breeding,
was
Hz
nests_
Minnesota
concerning
exposure.
485
shed
of
shed
disclosed
available
and
of
simulated
housing
front
the
(Travis,
Effects
information
duration
causes
during
Demonstrated
of
to
the
the
first
was
cannibalistic
evidence
in
from
panic
Dooms
behavior
No
the
booming
1967
ft
larger
emergence
to
to
were
exposed
in
frequency
Although
traced
bitch
other
sq
natural
in
everpressure
per
of
Tests
were
Ib
evidence
which
mink
2.0
mink
non-boomed
or
twenty
demonstrated
is
available
intensity,
effects
lacks
spectrum,
32
Effects
of Noise
Sprock,
wild
rats
Hz)
noise were
the sound
exposed
generator
1969)0
of
of recorded
to reverse
used
salmon
also
uut since
were
and
kept
not
and
in
the
and Rowe,
and
After
sonic
of
Vania
length
exposure,
field
underwater
and
did
caused
migrating
movement.
(1971)
river
projections
Similar
during
time
the
the ocean.
Hz and
random
noise
as
with
the killer
whales
previously
the
same
whale
from
been
of
that red
Pure
in the
tone
band
intensity
sounds.
moving
whales
recordings
movement
to
projected
gray
to prevent
migrating
2,000
had
that
sounds
the white
the whales
duration,
reported.
reported
were
times
mice
by an ultrasonic
(Greaves
pulse
to the
and house
ground.
an Alaskan
Hz were
rats
respectively
aversion
direction
into
on-off
of
distress
by rats
provided
intensity,
(1971)
at 500 and
the same
sounds
81 days
the testing
by Fish
500 to 2,000
effects
source
rat
spent
Norway
ultrasound
pulses
fingerlings
stimuli
The only
the sound
time
caged
frequencies
Recorded
of wild
killer-whale
white whales
subjected
source.
colonies
their
near
to reduce
displayed
Cummings
dB).
intensities.
The frequency,
not re-enter
(1967)
of varying
(60-140
to pulsed
time between
Jacob
nesting
for 76 and
the rodents
were
SPL
observed
Confined
were
and
very high
of
and
to sounds
decreased
calls were
area
Mammals
Howard,
and mice
(100-25,O00
death at
on
from
and
These
up the river,
exposed
to the
33
killer
whale
sounds
effectiveness
no conclusions
of the
It has been
(Griffin,
McCue,
themselves
electric
gland
high
18,000
in the
and
jamming
acoustic
available
noise
frequencies
frequency
to
.Effects
:
800-1000
unit.
of 2,000
modulated
of Noise
Birds were
(not
to drive
defined)
(Langowski,
This
and
to maximize
species
under
bats
repelled
Jamming
most
pineal
bats
(Miline,
the
use
a
(1970),
by
rabbits,
an acoustic
of the
a commercially
2 signals
having
are amplitude
efficiency
and
relative
observation.
and
effectively
repelled
of the species'
Jacobsen,
1969;
9 PM
(4,000-
by Av-Alarm,
which
8 to
in the
from
the levels
produces
Hz,
from
on Birds
recordings
Wight,
were
produced
4,000
A 60-dB
reported
to Crummett
unit
noise
12 adjustable
regarding
given)
when
7 AM and
(1970)
orient
from
in hibernating
by
of birds
they
changes
produced
were
the particular
6 to
Hill
According
to jamming
direction.
sound
(no details
signal
the same
1969).
species
signal
is greatest
the
in themselves.
are received
nucleus
about
Apparently
Krstic,
station.
and some
1963).
in histophysiological
Hz) dog whistles
power
noise
are resistant
a day from
supraoptic
frequency
nuclear
deer,
twice
resulted
and
bats
maksing
from
be drawn
the random
and signal
Signal
bell rung
Devercerski,
of
that
are received
7 days
and
and Grinnell,
angles.
signal
for
shown
so that noise
different
and
tones
could
by high-intensity
own distress
Messersmith,
calls
1970;
34
Wight,
1971).
rapid
when
However,
adaptation
even
presented
Pearson,
Skon,
residents
of Denver,
flocks
starlings
distress
calls
roosts.
The
of
starling
pation
in
human
to
the
disperse
longer
a nuisance.
evident,
roost
about
areas
to outlying
residents
Grant,
Pearson,
12
min.
30
Particithe
to
be
sufficient
they
recordings
the
of
of
where
played
at
half
appears
to the
son_
arrived
cycles
one
areas
dispersing
starling
birds
for
that
in
repeated
pl_yed
of
of
the
of
Habituation
although
reported
successful
as
effort
birds
calls
effectiveness,
recordings
calls
in urban
the
were
consisted
dispersal
population
(1967)
evenings
distress
distress
maximum
Corner
playing
recordings
reported
suggested.
Colorado,
four
specific
For
was
and
by
for
investigators
to species
presentation
of
same
continuously.
intermittent
see
the
are
was
no
not
recordings
continuously.
Thompson,
groups
of
evidence
starlings
that
differential
heart
by
by
sound.
subjected
acceleration
to
high
avian
and
rate
The
predators
caused
two
or
by
slight
three
and
found
through
measure
calls
fright
other
subjected
inform_tlon
response
acceleration
emitted
sounds
Distress
were
calls
(1968a)
different
specific
starlings
required
Corner
recorded.
heart
Escape
five
stimulation.
restrained
a
of
perceived
telemetrically
physically
the
one
birds
auditory
rate,
evidenced
to
the
to
and
produced
producing
and
slow
applications
as
habituation
starlings
heart
was
rate
before
35
habituation
occurred.
A human
acceleration
of heart
applications
Before
appeared
to
occurred
of
were
able
them
in
the
during
the
birds
normal
Starling
heart
slow
was
are
rate
during
normally
responses
the day were
rate.
increase
slower
the
in heart
faster
five.
rate
Block
calls
(1966)
to disperse
treatments
in
night
as
during
after
an
and react
to
the
day.
elevated
values.
and
simulated.
from
starlings
the Birds
an initial,
seemed
of starlings
baseline
tested
the decrease
tested
in
groups
to be operating.
of tape-recorded
during
to
were
and
were
initial
baseline
produced
lower
stimulus.
stimulus
the decrease
was
starlings
chambers
were
the day,
When
effect"
The
an acoustical
night,
the use
The number
were
regimes
different
response
a "flock
found
in acoustical
stimulus
at
than when
(1968b)
of the auditory
rate
roosting
1962.
used
the same
cited
rate
lighting
were
initial
Therefore,
rate
it appeared,
starlings
heart
significantly
during
place
stimuli
individually
to lO sec
of heart
than
of wild
active
Although
heart
and Corner
to night
calls
individually,
of
rates
day and
calls
ways.
housed
distress
Starlings
heart
were
to three
Feeding
took
sound
Pearson,
day relative
studied
wherein
heart
two
The starlings,
among
Grant,
elevated
a negligible
and habituation
adaptive
normal
required
in that
to discriminate
discrete
produced
occurred.
1.2 applications.
Thompson,
that
and
habituation
be "neutral"
acceleration
average
rate
voice
three
was
distress
series
reduced
of
from
36
I0,000
to
reported,
a few hundred
during
however,
the roosts
reinfested
that
by a majority
In
the final
(1963)
level
of approximately
required.
distress
was
it was
Noise
calls.
recommended
used
no
more
the
day.
A U.
ft over
birds
two
were
ranged
(with plane
few
birds
at
that
noise
and
500 ft).
in the
on
effects
Cypress
and
the noise
and
Swamp
they be
only
during
on
Jetport
of
500 to
reported
3,000
it was also
the time
and it
calls
report
at
was
birds'
observed.
plane
level
ear
(1969)
5,000
that
Noise
ft)
no
levels
to 96.5
reported
and wind
of
that
effects
readings.
Fish
of sound
Rep.
fishing
levels,
Interior
However,
sound
a noise
min
Observers
(with
area at
proper
to
20-30
no disturbances
dB
birds
bangs
at altitudes
in the park.
Problem
bird's
loud
each
population.
the
of distress
of the
flyovers
of 75
of Noise
of
the Big
on
to scare
quickly
2 min out of
of
resident
at the
in the case
jet
SPLs
(F A 0 Pisheries
in
adapted
sites
with
The
report
Birds
Impact
were
interfered
Effects
consisted
flushed
from
that
It was also
subsequently
former
85 dB SPL
S. Department
were
a Committee
reported
that
B-720
of
used
than
Environmental
discussed
of the
report
Noise
the experiment.
can
on fish
No. 76,
vessel
scare
1968).
noise,
have
also
It was
especially
schooling
fish.
been
noted
sudden
Both
studied
in
this
changes
diving
and
dB
37
_hanges
noise
in direction
appears
and
to a 2,000-Hz
sound
significantly
especially
and
most
species
Fitch
using
also
were
California
killed
killed
if their
(1948)
diving
heads
least
lions,
have
fish
bladders
three
and that
below
wave.
the area
explosions.
fish kills
Deaths
were
of the fish.
the surface
while
caused
They
explosions
occasionally
Brown
for
bladders,
out of
occasions
and California
were
air
to these
exploration.
of the air
the
(= S0 dB SPL).
explosions
also reported
seismic
on at
30 cm from
by the pressure
are resistant
sea
while
broadside
exposure
dynes/cm 2
fish that
of fish
that
after
were affemted
of 2.0
do not drive
by rupture
and
intensities_
clearly
for
mentioned
killed
hit
and Young
explosives
primarily
are
to fish.
locomotor
that underwater
some
frequency
type of noise
before
of the fish
reported
kill
if they
explosions
goldfish
an intensity
exploration
Low
(1968) analyzed
patterns
(1947)
observed.
frightening
at varying
above
Aplin
These
naive
Locomotor
seismic
were
Kleerekoper
of single
source.
fish
to be the most
Malar
patterns
by
cormorants
pelicans
during
were
an
explosion.
Effects
of Noise
The
destruction
at
the
(1965)
on
Insects
desirability
by insects
effects
reported
of noise
of protecting
has
on
stored
led to several
insects.
a 75% reduction
grain
studies
Kirkpatrick
in emerging
from
directed
and Hareln
Indian-meal
moth
38
adults
to
following
a
120
used
of
a
to
2,000-Hz
variety
sound
pure
on
134
at
71
of
dB,
and
variable
at
latter
part
and/or
mated
the
egg
as
by
dB,
10,000
180-2,000
Hz
in
stimulated
exposure
of
with
from
25
20
a
to
i0
(1969)
to
effects
study
at
He
dB,
90
at
dB,
90-105
for
2
to
any,
Hz
20,000
and
weeks
the
as
unmated
was
beetles
large
used
180-
during
4
Hz
also
dB
effect
flour
used
1,700
He
insects
noted,
exposed
numbers
of
of
sound
demonstrate,
because
of
variability
between
pupal
and
sound
of
Kirkpatrick
can
of
the
be
insects'
aS
respectively)
Indian-meal
loudspeakers,
of
sex-related
Cutkomp
sound,
days
possibly
stages
adult
data
well
itself.
that
per
the
(1969)
by
pulses
Lindgren
effects
different
pulsed
Hz
though
at
Hz.
113
stage
replications,
reported
2,000-40,000
larval
reported.
if
Lindgren
the
evidence
to
Even
at
the
mated
conflict
vs.
when
72-hr
little,
to
and
and
of
many
The
(1969)
of
stage
stimulation
some
exposed
Hz.
in
(larval
range
longevity
of
40,000
Tsao
Hz,
not
exception
differences
50,000
SPL
difficult
by
noted
with
Very
the
beetles.
Hz
Hz
adults.
cycles
moving
He
120
(1965)
explained
life
at
production.
Harein
flour
Hz
pupal
were
and
200
possible
exposure
intensities
dB,
the
used
and
ii0
He
of
unreported).
at
of
were
days
Hz
dB.
insects
and
moths
90-102
to
4
(SPL
frequencies
40,000
continuously
in
sound
frequencies
Hz
with
70
2,000
dB,
2,000
of
during
Indian-meal
tones
at
exposure
in
bells,
(1969)
at
corn
and
differences
having
seo
moths
65
dB
earworm
frequency
SPL,
whistles.
in
reported
a
ceased
the
that
of
reduced
moths
and
a
39
Mediterranean
stimulus
from
flour
in that
the sound
the mean
treated
with
which
and
in thermal
tissues
pure
tones
80 dB SPL
1,O00,
more
on
had
than
and
two out
of
300
and
Little
and 1,000
produced
was
Hz with
cessation
observed
by Little
with
having
sounds
cessation
did
not produce
three pairs
Frings
attracted
13-18
legs
and
swarms
dB above
(1959)
produced
the ambient
occurred
(undefined)
changes
in
described
effects
of 4,000
Hz at
tones
of
response
on
to certain
frequencies
ranging
from
was
continued
demonstrated
from
Vibration
(1959)
midges.
noise
"freezing
found
that
for 2 months.
stimulation
Hz produced
of antennae
of any
of the
response."
certain
Frequencies
level
between
produced
of
SPL
No habituation
200 to 2,000
but vibration
the
that
sounds.
107 to ll9 dE
for up to 20 mln.
in honeybees.
of _le
waves
a flying
that
intensities
Frings
(1969)
behavior,
in response
reported
the effect,
of
Arkhepov
trials.
frequencies
of movement
tones
Hz elicited
the study
Experiments
in the
(1969)
on feeding
of movement
although
effects,
animals.
moving
(1957)
away
5_
intensities
Although
three
cease
group.
Shulov
effect
10,000
reduced
and physiochemical
locusts.
Honeybees
Frings
high
report,
little
4,000,
was
of ultrasonic
of various
In a progress
of
to
to move
_o longevity
female
effects
exposure
resulted
organs
per
was an aversive
observed
to the untreated
lethal
extensive
were
In addition
of eggs
relative
that
The sound
the insects
source.
number
reported
moths.
sounds
125 Hz at
agitated
40
circling
of the
insects
with
aggregation
around
the
sound
source.
The
sound
is
Sound,
above
studies
an aversive
under
of inducing
changes
in some
of
acoustic
it
is logical
animals
are
as well.
by
in
the
sound,
items
certain
These
habitats,
animals
not
only
themselves
of
but also
made
animals;
desirable
because
diets _nd
affected
by
sound
on items
life
suggest
direct
in the
span
exposure
intrusion
possible
insects
significant
an insect's
certainly
in allowing
being
to be significantly
animals'
findings
because
repel
to consider
may be
and behavioral
undesirable
Apparently
capacity
be exercised
seem
appears
use is now
may also
also
in many
food chain.
sounds.
certain
something
and reproductive
should
Commercial
Insects
studied.
conditions,
physiological
sound
intense
organisms
exposure
to repel
to assume
important
li_s
longer
organisms.
show that
for most
measurable
devices
influenced
stimulus
somewhat
capable
of wildlife
to
caution
into
animal
effects
food
on the
chain
of
the animal.
Suspected
Although
directly
effects
with
can
(1) signal
Effects
there
is a limited
the effects
be inferred
production
for different
of Noise
species;
of noise
from
and
on Wildlife
body
literature
on wildlife,
inforn_tion
communication;
(3) direct
of
effects
dealing
possible
with:
_2) auditory
of
dealing
noise
ranges
that
have
41
been
demonstrated
(4) incidental
animals.
in
laboratory
observations
The
suspected
with
signals
Interference
with
Signals
vocalizations
many
types
warnings
or
of
such
about
the various
such
as distress,
detection
of prey
also
range
or escape
canary
of which
by
having
a noise
discussed
defined
frequency
concluded
to the
its
organism
that
will
potentially
influence
population
of young,
greatest
2,000
auditory
to 4,000
maximally
would
and
reported
sensitivity
Hz, which
represented
it would
be most
frequency
the
of a mate
background
(in press)
likely
in
of range
greatest
its
to be affected
They
of sensitivity,
and sound
capacity
is
permit
characteristics.
discrimination,
have
or alarm,
a predator.
from
the auditory
convey
danger
optimum
Miller
importance
calls
in
is representative,
species
the relative
thresholds,
and
has
If this finding
thus
from
the animal.
recognition
and care
frequencies
prediction
and
nesting
as either
of bird
Increases
to obtain
Mulligan,
of
food.
and
of frequencies
the range
songs.
of
signals
in an area,
to the
boundaries,
as spacing
the common
on
that
densities
that
effects
and
in wild
he categorized
and reports
these
Dooling,
to noise
the significance
and presence
processes
animals,
(1969) discusses
territorial
can mask
can
or direct
of information
young,
noise
of responses
effects
interference
Thorpe
or domestic
that
is
localization
most
representation
essential
in the
42
auditory
system,
capacity
such
animals
rely
utilizes
a mate
or
"separation
from
of
36
the
calls"
calls
increase
and
their
dB A to
when
63 dB A.
quail
that
different
cannot
hear
whistle).
ultrasonic
or even
to
70,000
signals
kinds
(Konishi,
Hz
and reptiles
lies
1970; Manley,
mate
does.
within
that
"silent"
up
both
cases.
above
as well
the
emit
Pye
and
Hz
(1970)
20,000
as from
audible
man's
man
dog
to 40,000
(i.e.,
However,
1970).
"sounds"
rodents
ranging
well
the
to remember
to the
and moths,
hats.
ultimate
signal-masking
in special
and
an
of the signal
a predator
to detect
ultrasonic
Such
The
is important
that
their
frequency
by whether
before
quail,
increased
ratio.
likely.
response
grasshoppers
of rodents
laost birds
it
frequencies
of
in the
possible
able
or 80,000
production
by certain
call
of
were
recognition
more
(1970) reported
to
the
are
the dog's
respond
reported
and
to analyze
species
Sewell
and
Japanese
levels
to noise
call"
on animals,
(e.g.,
to an animal
male
is determined
the "separation
of noise
whereas
the frequency
noise
signal
of the caller
to the
that
increase
localization
effects
range
The
the
In attempting
of
ambient
make detection
to
prey)
to recognize
increased
should
responds
many
reported
mates,
improved
significance
in
out a territory.
(in press)
from
is, a
to survive
important
signals
That
be greatest
signals
nocturnal
be more
intra-specific
Potash
isolated
and
would
to stake
would
on auditory
predators
resolution
of the others.
sensitivity
heavily
nocturnal
frequency
that
as hearing
that
(e.g.,
at the expense
range
audible
Hz)
43
Interference
man
in attempts
available
was
were
signal
time
to be
adaptation.
device
crop
was
recordings
feeding
the sound,
of rodents
that
produced
by the
reindeer
herding
(Klein,
also
represents
thus
control
unwanted
Frings
Skon,
and
birds."
Diehl
prevented
new
protected
to remove
which
It is
effects
were
were
reported
of recorded
with
species
Frings,
1957;
signals,
1967).
Block,
Frings
to
in
distress
(e.g.,
by
resident
to difficulties
interfere
and Corner,
on starlings
at the
the area
lines
and
when
interference
The use
to
used
to
available
or poisoning.
to contribute
attempts
1970;
entering
of power
1971).
certain
Pearson,
signal
"huM'
and
sound
by trapping
signals
effective
directly
Hz
and
on grain
te,@orarily
it was necessary
similar
disturb
1954;
from
of rodents
possible
Fitzwater,
a 22,000
were
a
_Iessersmith
acoustic
feeding
calls
Hz,
neural
A commercially
flocks
"...were
specific
efficiency
using
of
to provide
report,
by birds.
and aimed
that
although
populations
tests
distress
Both
volumes
reported
populations
of
on blackbird
of starling
at high
(1969)
results
on grapes.
jamming
signal
Hz and 4,000
species'
In a progress
depredations
used
2,000
by
consisted
modulated
with
maximizing
jamming
The signal
at about
used
A commercially
an acoustic
(1970).
compatible
been
species.
and amplitude
thus
described
control
used
frequency
constants,
(1970)
broadcasts
frequencies,
said
minimizing
that
has sometimes
unwanted
by Crummett
two different
which
signals
to control
device
described
with
calls
and
1966;
and Jumber,
44
Direct
Effects
It
is
of
very
physiological
in
animals.
animals
sufficient
be
subjected
chronic
produce
some
hormonally
hearing
loss
regulated
studies
are
to
noise
are
or
other
kinds
due
is very
to
noises
of
have
permanent
or
influence
in
that
wild
enough
noise
or
levels
could
due
these
that
stress
effects
to
are
responses.
due
to
exposure
capture,
answers
of
losses.
processes
in which
interference,
occur
hearing
'to noise-induced
effects
been
also
intense
moderate
from
noise-induced
unlikely
to
performed
separated
the
could
it
produce
exposure
of
that
animals
course,
to
many
changes
laboratory
duration
However,
that
behavioral
Of
will
Until
possible
and
demonstrated
wild
Noise
handling,
will
not
be
known.
Sonic
booms,
"super-boom,"
on
of
ravens
four
were
by
that
condors
nests
others.
traffic
flying
the
30
area.
sensitive
disturbed
by
were
The
most
recent
the
boom
in
to
(1970)
noise
his
area
deleterious
hatching
were
30
effects
failures
or
rapidly
ravens
ravens
that
abandoned
booms
their
three
70
about
and
SSTts
observations
reported
sonic
the
about
approximately
blasting,
mass
of
occurred,
the
nlin later
Shaw
very
described
cruising
5 mln
circling;
noise.
boon_
been
threat
speculation
(1967)
When
Within
in
were
when
Wales.
had
the
extensive
Davis
in
agitatedly
still
sonic
animals.
ravens
joined
especially
generated
effects
some
and
or
were
adult
their
even
attributed
of
sooty
to
terns
45
in
Dry
Tortugas,
Henkin
(1969).
99_
the
of
terns'
driven
birds
off
Graham
(1969)
by
sonic
the
when
booms.
reaction
dynamited
in
mismatch
a
a
and
regarding
recent
minimal
ranch
mink,
effect
hatching
he
energy,
and
signals
to
young,
appear
those
find
be
be
Dry
that
reported.
tha_
that
the
prey.
critically
adapted
_.+.+,
sonic
and
clearly
directly
sonic
was
affected
to sound
auditory
recognizze
predators..These
even
to
noise
+.+++
...........................................
on
terns'
boom
responding
affected
the
animals,
detrimental
sooty
_rles.
in
described
domestic
be
eMade
(1970),
booms,
a
t terri
impedance
obvious
Bell
anlmals__t_tha_t rely
_
the
an
to
of
those
allegations
Tortugas
will
a;'e capable
locate
comp!etely
---_+,..,.+.,+,.+u+++_.:+,.+
the
he
to
among
only
response
mates
and
The
startle
especially
could
to
A
to
booms
anin_lls.
was
seem
nests
described
With
would
pelican
their
to
Note:
eggs.
of
off
"similar
fishermen).
sonic
th____nimals
detect
functions
to
uncovered
fisherman
credence
responses
reaction
are
lend
animals'
discussed
Clearly,
nQise
to
of
wild
as
this
have
destruction
a
of
failure.
_+,e typical
by
appear
reactiozls
that
water
Extremely
may
the
that
(Author's
and
area
driven
boom
and
success,
1969.
were
veracity
and
the
of
said
sonic
in
damaged
the
review
only
to
fishpond."
air
over
pelicans
(1970)
breeding
hatch
and
also
Bell
of
observations
white
fish
between
impossibility
made
nests
Graham
of
to
flights
their
by
years
failed
reported
gulls
50
eggs
supersonic
by
discussed
Following
low-altitude
eggs
-_.j++++.--
Florida,
if
the
(i.e.,
anlmals
they
--+
46
show
no
behavioral
Ultin_tely
it
vital
processes
loss,
or
only
those
an
an
in
could
animals
at
nature"
can
to
expect
it
produces
do
be
some
point.
of
not
indirectly
other
point
disrupted
We
would
do
noise
pollution
its
to
to
an
By
well
to
in
noise
space
animals
are
not
important
affects
The
this
have
the
for
ecosystem.
be
needs,
that
when
disturbing
and
all
signals
though
could
animal's
animals
sound
Even
food
among
the
these
hearing
sound
for
affected
in
be
from
on
whether
system.
even
rely
avoidance).
signal-masking,
competition
appropriate
or
animal
responding
Consequently,
or
the
interrelationships
ecosystem.
functions
to
startle
through
noise,
niche
as
neuro-endocrine
capable
complex
to
matter
the
by
ecological
such
affected
on
animals
responsive
one
not
are
affected
results
in
does
effects
directly
in
response
"balance
balance
some
knowledge
wildlife
habitats
at
even
of
what
before
effects.
Discussion
It
found
and
is
a
documented,
noise
the
now
most
overview
what
proven
hearing
structure
in
an
of
clearly
on
auditory
ani_l_l, wha
!_
for
discussion
exposure
suff!ci_/en t
time
with
it
of
might
effect
organisms
is
a resulting
the
mean.
of
_likely_
_-------_-----°r
possible
The
high
that
loss
s_area__o_produee--m_Inss_of__h_sm/n=
an
_are.------.the
literature
best
intensity
of
of
damage
to
hearing.
in
.GOnS_.quences-e*f
8___e_n
-
of
47
such
he
a
decrease
noted
in
that
audible
range
c0nsequelleeS
anlm_%l
that
starve
if
depends
for
anlm_is
a
loss
he_ring
to
and
effect).
in
Detection
he
hindered,
mortality
or
malls
not
may
could
its
audible
not
_bility
be
to
and
the
avoid
o___'_udltory
an
area
could
of
cries
of
prey
The
the
The
could
animal
that
predators
signals
(_ski_g
also
increased
the
same
by
the
mother
rates
of
infant
significantly
be
these
Distress
again
could
could
of
produce
young
the
Anticipated
its
mating
reproduction.
received,
and
arp___Z.
locate
dec/_ur_i_l.A'.A_@s.
be
should
9_ssti_ally93_anged.
ears
to
it
r_nge
known.
decreased,
leading
First,
their
is
detect
affect
noise
in
hearing
acuity
Reception
by
of
on
auditory
diminished
signals
all
depends
he killed.
could
differ
situation
on
sensitivity?
animals
of
prey--predator
auditor_
or
w_rning
affectls_
survival.
Consid@rablyless
the._i_l_
thinE,
' oon_e__uences
at
clear
cut
conditions,
there
be
are
_%de
to
The
best
and
some
be
of
of
the
reproducible
and
some
reports
viewed
only
some
of
as
effects
of
possible
small,
precisely
and
dlscussln_
For
m_ny
one
are
not
controlled
But
reported,
their
in
e_fects.
are
as
significant
ovaries)
possible
suggested.
effects,
anticipate
is
non-audltory
under
are
non-auditory
and
should
assurance
assumln_
an
attempt
that
will
consequeaces.
changes
sexual
serious
in
reproductive
function
threats
te
(estrus)
the
animal's
48
reproductive
capacity.
levels
expected
sources
could
If chronic
to result
be shown
be little
doubt
to verify
and
from
to
about
known
produce
the
elaborate
exposure
danger
such
to sound
or projected
such
sound
effects,
there
to the species.
effects
pressure
can
Studies
should
be made
audi_ogenic
seizures
as soon
as possible.
The
literature
describing
following
noise
increased
susceptibility
exposed
exposure,
to sound
can he induced
particular
seizures
strains
critical
species.
stimuli
including
but they
'this effect
seizures
of animals
of a
other
There
as one meriting
to induce
than
genetic
are references
of various
apparently
can
audiogenlc
difficult
individuals
are
in fetuses
of pregnancy
in animals
to be susceptible.
in isolated
dismiss
strains
is exceedingly
such seizures
man
seizures
First,
certain
It
to acoustic
demonstrating
stages
summar_y.
in 9nly
known
possibly
to audiogenic
during
almos._tbe dismiss_
and
rare.
little
species
Thus
or no
to
we
further
concern.
A number
noise-induced
Apparently
system,
of physiological
changes
noise
can
producing
circulating
catecholamlnes
blood
in
a variety
affect
such
have
of animal
revealed
species.
hypothalamic-hypophyseal
in e_e_le_cctrolyte
excret_n,
of eosinophils,
and steroids
stzes_,__an_influence
the
alterations
levels
measures
from
the
and release
adrenals.
hormonally-regulated
of
Such
functions
as
49
mating
have
the
and reproduction.
serious
consequences
individual
organism.
techniques
changes
will
so
confounded
noted
,_sked
exploratory
could
huddling,
animal.
or
Also,
well
even
In_9_neral
suggested
a_i_l
or increase
handusosome
dee-r_,s
effects
of them
changes
due
and
few
noise
of the •behavioral
if they
and
and restraint.
Decreased
of
like
occur
nature
under
do
uo_ adapt
out
such
as piling
up or
for survival
of an
could
restrict
adversely
affect
access
to
an animal's
for survival.
if any
of the reported
on animals
his chances
might
if at all
not be
things
lead to problems
then,
of such
habitat,
will
of some
behavior
and
to captivity
type behavior
for
possibl[
would
benefit
survival.
lead
or
to his
On the
death
the
other
or
e_l_a'ie_
Suggestions
In ey_mining
on
natural
stimulation
chances
of
measures
to evaluate.
and therefore
a species'
equipment
to obtain
consequences
avoidance
or shelter
as for
immobility,
panic
could
as well
in their
difficult
of chronic
Any
the species
consequences
have significant
time.
could
by changes
behavior,
conditions
food
are
effects
noise-lnduced
The possible
effects
these
Sophisticated
animals
that
or
for
be necessary
in wild
possible,
over
Obviously
animals
in _eneral
the
for
Research
literature
n_ m_
and on wildlife
_ets
in.articular,
of
noise
it is
5O
extremely
dif_icult._to
needs__r-_@s_areh.
this.
With
li_e_tur
find_whezc--t0_begin_in_detailing
There
are
amd--hea_in_--,wall_.gont[olled,
are_.
wildlife,
then,
programs
large
and
in our
of
the
meticulous,
studying
the effects
exposure
should
ambiguities,
noise.
are
of
even
It could
precise
long
term
to
not be
De that
not
be
intensity,
spectrum,
and
duration
auditory
controlled.
sensitivity
acoustic
of
stimulation
of non-auditory
physical
noted
to add
with
a program
the specific
to maximize
"acute"
the
should
De
should
consider
ani,_l
the
effects
of "chronic"
that
of exposure
Such
noise
the uncertainties,
conditions
necessary
the
wildlife.
"chronic"
and other
under
of
to
systematically
low level
effects
It should
set and
program
in reports
sexual,
observed
upon
eliminate
conflicts
in order
understanding
of noise
and
well
two different
are indicated
exposure.
tailor
of noise
studies
at least
effects
metabolic,
might
precisely
desigl}e_d
effects
such
selenZific
he initiated
and
physiological,
that
of research
gaps
extent
A thorough,
exposure
of
is apparent
concomitant
nature
for
_onexistent.
It
the
well
npn-auditory
In__the case
virtually
the
two reasons
th__-axcepe-_on-of--t_he--largeT--well--dene.-hody of
ex_pr_h_ta_hiaf_ing
of
least
e'-exp'_orTng -th e_"eT fe c%s_ef--no&s_-upon., auditpr y
struc
r_es
fill
at
studied
likelihood
and
of
results.
Concurrent
and
other
physical
with
careful
and chemical
examination
effects
of
of physiological
noise
on animals
51
should
be a program
effects
of noise
habitat
under
,_ny
aspects
approach.
study
and
studios
of their
functions,
believe
A survey
over
knowledge
long
events.
of such
pre-change
changes
to
aspects
periods
and
so
the
levels
the sake
i.e.,
aircraft
noise,
other
transportation
noise.
Such
a course
would
at
the results.
for
a considerable
than
"acute"
nature,
would
Such
expect
data.
from
of
in
in the field,
he 3 to 4 years.
Fer
some
the
levels
and
the
with
The
well
he
be
or industrial
validity
maintained
"chronic"
for a study
conditions
types
face
should
course
but
advances,
noise,
to provide
time
and under
could
provide
level
time
A minimum
compared
technological
least
changes
length
varied
of validity,
one might
for
the sound
considered.
sound
in depth,
is available
be systematically
for all of
exposure
occurring
inhabitants,
population
to
that sufficient
knowledge
the
for
in their
noise
be made
on
in level,
entail
is reason
infrequently
its
should
changes
data
should
sufficient
would
reproductive
ambient
time
have
as detailed
there
in
of
regarding
Once
as well
by changes
would
of animals
that
native
a multi-disciplinary
the problem
chemistry,
of the habitat
enough
environment
effects
due
other
the environment
the
blood
a program
counts
of
in their
require
be necessary
is amassed
relevant
existing
to
Census
normal
to the study
Such
approach
would
and any
wildlife,
of necessity
may be affected
levels.
in
would
factors.
habitat
devoted
conditions.
An adequate
natural
about
on true
normal
of many
i.e.,
of research
outlined
of animals
rather
of
this
above,
in some
52
places
more
studies,
time would
efforts
anin_ls
leave
of sound,
should
the area
and
place
taken
Other
relevant
the
the
by other
be
same?
Does
the
food
suggesting
source
and
thus
that
contiguous
possible
effects
above
way.
of
the wide
density
of
a great
An
the
many
mask
levels.
Frequencies
are
within
the
effects,
consideration
to be
audible
are
the animal
program
such
study
as similar
as
area
as
is mandatory
for,
populations
if any,
from
in planning
inaudible
range
in
change
in the population
investigated,
that
could
If unaccounted
in animal
the food
a control
of design
variations
animals.
any real
important
kind
if the data
changes
and
but
Certainly
in an area
areas
of
might
related
correct,
of a research
or
etc.
relations
population.
be to provide
This
fluctuations
frequencies
well
part
normal
weight,
and
does
decrease,
noise
subsequent
species.
include,
increase,
were
animals
to the experimental
in every
completely
in the
the
levels
or other
of predator-prey
for
would
whether
would
possible
in field
or is their
health,
on insects
An essential
normal
area
general
A study
because
be
the
of the other
suggested
cyclic
in the
he responsible
population.
answered
of anin_%ls is important
noise
of some
to be
time
by higher
of the same,
for changes
supply
to determine
later return,
to determine
causes
At the same
stimulation
animals
level
valuable,
unobvious
upon
questions
anii:u%l change?
also
be n_de
if so, do they
the ani:m%l density
remain
be needed.
might
the
animal
should
as the sound
to humans
of many
noise.
research
as well
these
(ultrasound)
species.
53
Aquatic
high
an
mammals,
frequency
important
must
bats,
role
as what
the impact
wildlife
must
to determine
audible
area
considered
noise
what ultrasonic
range
will
and mother
of
of expected
of
during
food.
There
noise
(to humans)
and
frequencies
would
In view
chickens,
turkeys,
animals
it
value.
Research
of this
at the Institute
National
France
communication,
is clear
(personal
that
a proolem
to deafen
young
which
on sexual
on
seem
of the
research
in
general
type
Reserche
_hey
them
gain
the many
this
area
to suspect
might
prove
Jouy
En Josas,
INRA).
and safely.
They
chickens
is
have
might
ga.iZt..l_Or_-.w_e
_ig___f.r_Qi__t
Ika--s
ama_ amo_l_t~.oI__e._._,
..£o!esumR bIy
because
other
had
they
were
chickens
lower
It
less
around
activity
distracted
them,
less
the
noises
nervous,
of the
or perhaps
levels.
is exceedingly
the research
were
by
suggested
difficult
above.
to
assign
%When all of
of
underway
considering
deaf
of
domestic
R. G. Busnel,
cheaply
and
other
is currently
are currently
on the
importance
Agronomique,
Dr.
noise
function,
economic
and
to he
suggestions
on weight
sheep,
chickens
leads
are clear
pregnancy,
cattle,
For example,
sources
be produced,
r eseareh_elfozt
animals.
influences
utilization
very
to play
Potential
frequencies
_here
domestic
of possible
evidence
having
and_.indioated-would-be-that--of--effe_ts_of
on various
how
are
cries
he investigated.
Another
_etus
which
emit
in communication.
of the entire
justified
rodents,
components,
be analyzed
as well
and
priorities
to
it is necessa1'y
54
and should
be done
information
by way
more
information
from
conducted
immediate
studies
scope,
vital
on wildlife
still
only
could
be required
be conducted,
could
decisions,
priorities
of
field
ior
to provide
however,
he secured
and
practical
through
use
scale and
be secured
can
be done
out that
laboratory
information
possibly
could
studies.
laboratory
If
a
the effects
in 3 or 4 years.
laboratory
to obtain
be
encompassing
regarding
concurrent
order
complete
all that
to point
large
that
in
the
is
"than from
on a sufficiently
enough
of noise
would
essential
of assigning
gleaned
large
in order
studies
information
research.
It
that
55
Appendix
The literature
a search
by manual,
written
search
the
literature
and
science
of
was
Manual
searches
of Tennessee
was
on
other
Library
Medical
libraries
small
found in the catalogs.
the
abstracts,
source
bibliography
to thal_
especially
those
depth
into
and
of coverage,
conservation,
the
who
(John
Library
listed
number
and
was
public
Brister
(Mooney
in the
people
gave
time
who
for
Library),
biblio-
and monographs
manual
bibliographies
carried
catalogs
Memorial
source
of books
of everyone
many
in the
A comprehensive
indexes,
It is the desire
search
assure
conducted
University
A relatively
the
interview,
agriculture,
were
University
graphy.
be divided
searched.
State
and
To
medicine,
generally
personal
means.
of Memphis
Library),
can
computer,
communication
_
search
listed
in
out.
who has
worked
on this
helped
in any way,
personal
interviews
and
correspondence.
i
!
_The
literature
from
the Environmental
Dr.
John
Harvey,
compiled
The
L. Fletcher,
Associate
was
conducted
Protection
Professor
Professor
the source
information
Virginia
search
was
M. Norton,
under
Agency
Contract
under
of Psychology,
of Biology.
Wilma
bibliography
and served
obtained
analyzed
Clara
and
B. Davis,
as
68-04-0024
the direction
and
Dr.
of
Michael
J.
P. Hendrix
library
by June
and Richard
No.
consultant.
W. Blackwell,
L. Taylor.
56
Library
Department
H.
of the
Catalogs
Interior
Searched
Library
W. Calhoun Medical
Library
(Administrative
for the Southeastern
Regional
Medical
John
Hrister
Library,
Memphis
Library
of Congress
Library
of the National
Mooney
National
Memorial
Library
Smithsonian
Robert
Library,
State
Academy
cf
Headquarters
Program)
University
Science
University
of Tennessee
Medical
Units
of _dicine
Institution,
W. Woodruff,
University
Library
Library
Computer
of Natural
for
Advanced
History
Studies,
Emory
Searches
Alabama
MEDLARS Center
The University
of Alabama
Medical Center Library
Birmingham,
Alabama
S5233
Effects
of Noise Pollution
December,
1968.
Key Words:
Effects
Key
of Sound
Words:
on Wildlife,
January,
1964
-
Animal kingdom
- invertebrates
Anin_l
kingdom
- vertebrates
Acoustic
trauma
Acoustics
Audiomstry
Auditory
perception
Auditory
threshold
Hearing
Hearing
tests
Noise
Pitch discrimination
Sound
Ultrasonics
on Wildlife,
Animal
kingdom
January,
19S9
- July,
- invertebrates
1971.
57
Computer
Searches
(continued).
Animal
kingdom
- vertebrates
Acoustic
trauma
Acoustics
Auditory
perception
Hearing
Hearing
tests
Noise
Sound
Library
Reference
Service, Current
Conservation
Library Center
Federal
Aid in Fish and Wildlife
Denver
Public
Library
1357
Broadway
Denver_
Colorado
80203
Noise
Pollution
and
and
its Effects
on
going
on Wildlife
North Carolina
Science and Technology
Research
Research
Triangle
Park, North Carolina
27709
Biological
Key
Abstracts,
1959
words _¢en
from
Subject
Index
Preliminary
following:
searches
were
research
- June
(STRC)
1971
B.A.S.I.C.
conducted
Center
Eeyword
on each
and
of
the
The NASA Information
File
Department
of Defense
File
Engineering
Index
Chemical
Abstracts
The results
of the preliminary
searches
were such that
the STRC engineers advised
that no further attempts
be
made to search
these files for materials
on noise and
its effects
on wildlife
Science
Information
Exchange
Smithsonian
Institution
A National
Registry
of Research
Madison
National
Ba_Building
1730 M. Street, N. W.
W_shington,
D. C. 20036
in Progress
Effects
of Noise, Ultrasonics,
and Other
Frequencies
on Wildlife
and Insects
Sound
58
Computer
Searches
(continued).
Aircraft
Noise and Sonic Boom Studies:
Effects on
People, Animals
and Buildings
Generation
and Propagation
of Noise
Development
and Design of Low Noise Aircraft
Engines
Noise in the Vicinity
of Airports
Noise Abatement
Studies
Abstracts,
ABstracts
of World
Association,
Agricultural
1964.
Armed
and
Indexes,
Catalogs
Medicine.
London,
1947 - May 1971.
Index.
New York, H.
(Ceased publication)
Forces Medical Library
Library,
1950-54.
Bibliographic
Index.
June
1971.
New
Searched
British
W. Wilson,
Catalog.
York,
Medical
H.
1950
U. S. Army
W.
Wilson,
-
Medical
1950
-
Bibliography
of Agriculture.
Department
of Agriculture.
Washington,
D. C., 1942 - June 1971.
Biological
Abstracts.
Philadelphia,
Biological
and Agricultural
1964 - June 1971.
Pa.,
Index.
New
Bloresearch
Titles.
Philadelphia,
Pa.,
Service of Biological
Abstracts,
Bloreseareh
Index.
Philadelphia,
Pa.,
Service of Biological
Abstracts,
Books
in Print.
New
York,
Bowker,
1950-1971.
York,
H. W. Wilson,
Bioscienee
Information
1965 - 1967.
Bicsclence
Information
1967 - May 1971.
1970-71.
(One
year)
British
Abstracts
of Medical Science.
London, Pergamon Press,
for Biological
and Medical Abstracts,
1954 - 1956.
Catalog
of Grants.
Foundation,
Washington,
1970 - June
Cumulative
Book Index.
June 1971
New
D. C.,
1971.
York,
H.
National
W. Wilson,
Science
1950
-
Cumulative
Veterinary
Index; a selected
llst of publications
from the American
literature.
Arvada,
Colorado,
Index Incorporated,
1970 - May 1971,
59
Current
DSH
Contents
- Life Sciences.
for Scientific
Information,
Philadelphia,
Institute
1958 - June 9, 1971
Abstracts.
American
Speech and Hearing Association
and
Gallaudet
College.
Washington,
Deafness,
Speech,
and Hearing
Publisher,
1960 - June, 1971.
Dissertation
Abstracts.
Microfilms,
1952
Ann Arbor, Michigan,
- June, 1971.
Environmental
Law Abstracts.
National
Laboratory,
Excerpta
Medlca,
Ore-,
University
Oak Ridge, Tenn., Oak Ridge
1955 - February,
1971.
Herengraeht,
Amsterdam.
Rhino-, Laryngology,
Section XI, Vol. 1 (1948)
(June, 1971)
- Vol.
24, No.
General
Pathology
and Pathological
Anatomy,
Sec_-6_'_o.T_I
(1948) " Vol,---v_O.
(April, 1971)
6
4
Public Health, Social Medicine,
and Hygiene,
"-'----_e_tion xvTi_,'-Vol.---I--_I'_gS)--Vo--W/?-T97No.=4
(April, 1971)
Index
Catalogue
of the Library
of the Surgeon General's
Office,
United States Army.
_ashington,
Superintendent
of Documents.
Series,
1880-1961.
Index
Medleus
Quarterly
Cumulative
Literature.
AMA,
Index to Current Medical
Chicago,
1916-26.
Quarterly
Cumulative
1927-1956.
Index
_dicus.
AMA,
Chicago,
Current
List of Medical
1950-1959.
Literature.
AMA,
Chicago,
Current
List of Medical
Library,
Washington,
Literature.
Army Medical
(Vols. 19-36), 1950-1959.
Index Medicus.
American
Chicago,
1960 - July
Medical
1971.
International
Abstracts
Pergamon
Press,
Monthly
Catalog.
1950 - May
Association,
of Biological
Sciences.
1956 - May 1970.
Washington,
1970.
Superintendent
London,
of Documents,
6O
National
Library
of Medicine
N_tional
Institute
of
Health,
Education
and
National
Library
of Medicine
Current
Catalog.
Washington,
D. C., National
Institute
of Health,
Public
Health
Service,
Health,
Education
and Welfare
Department,
1966
- 1970.
Pandex.
New York,
Pandex,
Inc.,
1967 - 1968
(Microfiche)
(Published
since
1969 by CCM
Information
Science
Incorporated,
New York)
Pollution
ABstracts.
1970
- June
W.
1971.
Catalog.
Health,
Welfare
Farmer.
Washington,
D. C.,
PubIic
Health
Service,
Department,
1965 - 1965.
La
Jolla,
California,
Psychological
Abstracts.
American
Psychological
Incorporated_
Washington,
D. C., 1950 Public
Affairs
Affairs
December
Information
Information
1970.
Readers'
Guide
Wilson,
to Periodical
Literature.
1950 - May 1971.
Science
Citation
Scientific
U.
S.
Service.
Service.
New
S.
U.
York,
Index.
Philadelphia,
Institute
Information,
1961 - .May 1971.
Government
Research
Government-wide
Development
S. Government
January
1971
Abstracts.
Service,
1954
Zoological
Record.
London,
1950
Reports,
-
Research
and
May 1971.
Washington,
- December
London.
The
- May 1971.
June
-
Development
D. C.,
1970.
Fish
zoological
W.
of Commerce.
and Technical
1954
1971.
H.
for
1964.
Index
to Federal
Research
Reports,
1965 - 1970.
Government
Reports
Index,
of publication
changed)
Wildlife
Bulletin
of the Public
New York,
1950
-
Government
Research
Reports.
Department
Clearing
House
for Federal
Scientific
Information_
Washington,
D. C. :
U.
Association,
June
1971.
and
Reports,
(one
and
issue,
Wildlife
Society
of
name
61
Bibliographies
Searched
Acoustical
Society of America.
Report of the 80th Annual
Meeting.
November,
1970, Houston,
Texas.
Advances
in Ecological
Research.
1962 - June 1971.
Advances
in Environmental
Interscience,
Vol.
New York,
Academic
Sciences.
New York, Wiley
1 - 1969 - June 1971.
Press,
-
Environment.
St. Louis, Missouri,
Committee
for Environmental
Information.
Vol. l, No. l, January-February,
1961.
Environmental
Research.
New York, Academic
Press,
Vol. l, No. l, June, 1967 - June 1971.
Inc.,
Environmental
Science and Technology.
Washington,
D. C.,
American
Chemical
Society Publications,
Vol. l,
No. i, January 1967 - June 1971.
Heinemann,
Jack M. Effects of Sonic Booms on the Hatehahility
of Chicken
Eggs and Other Studies of Aircraft-Generated
Noise Effects on Animals.
TRW Life Sciences Center.
Hazleton
Laboratories,
Inc., 1965.
International
Civil Aviation
Organization.
Sonic Boom
Supplement.
Montreal,
12-21 October,
1970.
pp.
1-55/i-59.
DOC. 8894, SBP/II.
National
Rice,
Panel,
Academy
of Science.
National Research
Council.
Committee
on SST - Sonic Room, Subcommittee
on
Animal
Response.
An Annotated
Bibliography
on
Animal
Response
to Sonic Booms and Other Loud
Sounds.
Washington,
D. C., 1970.
C. G. and G. M. Lilley.
University
of Southampton.
Report
in five parts on the sonic boom.
Prepared
for
the OECD Conference
on Sonic Boom Research.
Part 4, 1969.
Science
and Citizen.
Environmental
United
Nations.
Food and Agricultural
Organization
of the
United
Nations.
Report on a Meeting for Consultations
On Underwater
Noise, Rome, Italy, December,
19R8. (1970)
U.
St. Louis,
Information,
Missouri,
Committee
for
Vol. I-X, 1958 - 1968.
S. Department
of Health, Education
and Welfare,
Public
Health
Section.
Reports
on the Epldemology
and
Surveillance
of Injuries.
No. FY 71-RI.
The Role
of Noise as a Physiologic
Stressor.
pp. 1-SR, 1969.
62
Persons
Providing
Information,
Bible,
Materials,
and
Assistance
Senator
Alan.
(Nevada),
on Parks
and Recreation
on Public
Lands.
Bond,
Chairman
Hearings
of tile Subcommittee
on Alterrain
Vehicles
James.
Research
Animal
Scientist,
Research
Service,
U. S. Department
Beltsville,
Maryland.
Animal
Science
of Agriculture,
Carlisle,
John
G.,
of Fish
and
Shore,
Long
Chatham,
George
N.
Analyst
in Environmental
mental
Policy
Division,
Legislative
Library
of Congress.
Cope,
Department
350 Co]den
Policy,
Reference
EnvironService,
Oliver.
Fisheries
Research,
Bureau
of Sport
Fisheries
and Wildlife,
Fish
and Wildlife
Service,
Department
of the Interior,
Washington,
D. C.
Crummett,
Curtis,
Fish,
Jr.
Associate
Marine
Biologist,
Game,
Marine
Resources
Region,
Beach,
California
90802.
James
G.
Av-Alarm
Suite
170,
Los Altos,
William
H.
James
F.
Department
Foster,
The
Wilderness
Naval
Undersea
of the Navy,
Charles
R.
Department
S. W., Washington,
D.
Gales,
Robert
Center
Corporation,
Cali£ornia
Society,
San
Antonio
Washington,
D.
Rd.,
C.
of
Transportation,
400
7th
Street,
C.
S.
Naval
Undersea
Research
(The
Listening
Group),
San
Doyle.
Manager,
Marine
Department
of Fish
and
Long
Beach,
California
Konishi,
Masakazu.
Princeton
Lemke,
Darrell
H.
Coordinator
of
of Universities,
Washington,
Associate
University,
N.
Research
and Development
Center,
San Diego,
California
92132.
Gates,
Lipscomb,
9S0
94022
Resources
Game,
350
90802.
Professor,
Princeton,
and Development
Diego,
California
92132.
Region,
California
Golden
Shore,
Department
New
Jersey
Library
D. C.
Programs_
of Biology,
08S40.
Consortium
David
M.
Associate
Professor
of Audiology
and
Speech
Pathology,
Director,
University
of Tennessee
Noise
Study
Laboratory,
Knoxville,
Tennessee
37916.
6S
Marler,
Peter.
Professor
of Animal Behavior,
Department
of
Animal
Behavior,
Rockefeller
University,
66th Street
and York Avenue, New York, New York 10021.
Miller,
James D.
Head, Psychology
Laboratories,
Research
Department,
Central
Institute
for the Deaf, 818 South
Euclid, St. Louis, Missouri
6Sll0.
Nixon,
Charles W.
AMRL (BBA),
Norris,
Kenneth
S. Director,
The
Oceanic Center, Waimanale,
Potash,
Lawrence.
Psychology
Department,
Alberta,
Edmonton,
Alberta
Canada.
Segal,
Migdon.
Analyst in Environmental
Policy, Environmental
Policy Division,
Legislative
Reference
Service,
Library of Congress.
Shaw,
Aerospace
Medical Research
Wright
Patterson
AFB, Ohio
Lab, 6570
4543S.
Oceanic
Institute,
Hawaii 96795.
University
Makapuu
of
Elmer.
Analyst in Environmental
Policy, Environmental
Policy Division,
Legislative
Reference
Service,
Library
of Congress,
Washington,
D. C.
Taylor,
John P.
National
Academy
of Sciences,
National
Research
Council,
2101 Constitution
Ave., N.W.
Washington,
D. C. 20418.
Thompson, R. D.
U. S. Bureau
Denver,
Colorado.
Tcmbaugh,
Welch,
Larry.
National
of Sport
Science
Fisheries
Foundation,
and
Wildlife,
Washington,
Bruce L.
Friends of Psychlatric
Research,
52 Wade Ave., Baltimore,
Maryland
21228.
D. C.
Incorporated,
i
Organizations
Materials,
Aircraft
Providing
Information,
Noise Abatement.
U. S. Department
of
Federal Aviation
Administration,
Transportation,
Washington,
D. C.
Agricultural
Research
Center.
Beltsville,
Maryland.
Bell Aerospace
Co:_any.
and Assistance
U.
Buffalo,
S. Department
New York.
of
Agriculture,
64
Bell
Laboratories.
07974.
600 Mountain
Ave.,
Murray
Hill,
New Jersey
Blackwater
National
Wildlife
Refuge.
Bureau of Sport
Fisheries
and Wildlife,
Fish and Wildlife Service,
U. S. Department
of the Interior,
Rt. I, Box 121,
Cambridge,
_ryland
21613.
Bureau
of Sport Fisheries
and Wildlife.
U. S. Department
of the Interior, Washington,
D. C.
Citizens
League Against
the Sonic Boom,
Cambridge,
_ssachusetts
02138.
Citizens
for a Quieter City, Inc.
The American
Red Cross
Building,
150 Amsterdam
Ave., New York, New York 10023.
Defenders
D.
of
C.
Wildlife.
20036.
2000
N Street,
Environmental
Planning
Division.
Washington,
D. C.
19 Appleton
N.
Housing
W., Washington,
and Urban
Environmental
Policy Division.
Legislative
Reference
Library of Congress,
Washington,
D. C.
Federal
Aviation Administration.
U. S.
Transportation,
800 Independence
D. C. 20590.
Langley
Research
Center.
Administration,
National
National
Academy
U. S.
Hampton,
of Engineering.
Academy of Sciences.
Washington,
D. C.
National
Virginia.
Development,
Service,
Department
of
Avenue, Washington,
Aeronautics
Washington,
National
Street,
and
Space
D. C.
Research
Council,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration.
Environmental
Data Service,
U. S. Department
of Commerce,
Roekville,
Maryland
20852.
National
Science
National
Wildlife
Washington,
Foundation.
Washington,
Federation.
1412
D. C. 20036.
Office
of Environmental
U. S. Department
Office
of Noise Abatement.
of Transportation,
Sixteenth
Quality.
Federal
of Transportation,
Research
Washington,
D. C.
Street,
N. W.,
Aviation Administration,
Washington,
D. C.
Division,
D. C.
U. S.
Department
65
Patuxent
Urban
Transportation
Center.
Washington,
D. C.
Wildlife
The
Wildlife
Research
Center.
Bureau of Sport Fisheries
and Wildlife,
Fish and Wildlife
Service, U. S.
Department
of the Interior,
Laurel,
Maryland 20810.
_nagement
20005.
Institute.
Consortium
Wire
Wildlife
Society.
3900 Wisconsin
Washington,
D. C. 20016.
Woods
Hole Oceanographic
02543.
Institution.
of Universities,
Building,
Ave.,
Woods
Washington,
N. W.,
Hole,
Suite
D. C.
S-176,
Massachusetts
66
References
Anthony,
A. and Ackerman,
E.
Effects
of noise on the blood
eosinophll
levels and adrenals
of mice.
Journal of
the Acoustical
Society of America,
1955, _-7_-_4----
Tiq_
9".
Anthony,
A. and Ackerman,
E.
Biological
effects of noise
in vertebrate
animals.
Wright Air Development
Center,
WADA Technical
Report
57-647, November,
1957, ll8 pp.
Anthony,
A., Ackerman,
E. and Lloyd, J.A.
Noise stress
laboratory
rodents.
I. Behavioral
and endocrine
response
of mice, rats, and guinea pigs.
Journal
of the Acoustical
Society
of America,
1959,_,
T_3U-L"I437 .'
Anthony,
A. and Harclerode,
J. E.
Noise stress in laboratory
rodents.
II. Effects
of chronic noise exposures
on
sexual performance
and reproductive
function
of
guinea pigs.
Journal of the Acoustical
Seciet_ of
flmerica,
1959, -_--'1_3_F_1440. '
Aplin,
J. A.
The
California
effect of explosives
Fish
and Game,
1947,
in
on marine life.
33(1),
23-30.
Arkhepov,
N. S., et al.
Biological
effect of high-frequency
ultrasound.
U. S. Department
of Commerce,
Joint
Publication
and Research
Service,
JPRS 47378,
1969,
10 p.
Beagley,
H. A.
Acoustic
Electrophysiology
1965a,
60,
437-451.
Beagley,
H. A.
Acoustic
trauma
in the
guinea
pig.
II.
Electron
microscopy
including
the morphology
of all
junctions
in the organ
of Corti.
Acta
0to-Laryngologiea,
1965b,
60,
479-495.
Bell,
guinea
pig.
I.
Acta Oto-Laryngologica,
W. B.
Animal response
to sonic boom.
at the 80th meeting of the Acoustical
America,
Houston, November,
1970.
Benitez,
r
trauma
in the
and history.
Paper presented
Society of
L. D., Eldredge,
D. H., and Templet,
J. W.
Electrophysiologlcal
correlates
of behavioral
temporary
threshold
shifts in chinchilla.
Paper
presented
at the 80th meeting of the Acoustical
Society of America, Houston,
November,
1970.
67
Block,
B. C.
Williamsport
Pennsylvania
tries starling
control with distress
calls.
Pest Control,
1966,
34, 24-30.
Bond,
J. Responses
of man and lower animals
to acoustical
stimuli.
U. S. Department
of Agriculture,
Agricultural
Research
Service,
Animal and Poultry
Husbandry
Research
Branch,
Beltsville,
Maryland,
October
l, 1956.
Bond,
J. Effects of noise on the physiology
and behavior of
farm animals.
Physiological
Effects
of Noise,
B. L. Welch and'A. S. Welch (_,
l_O,--_
York:
Plenum Press, 295-306.
Bond,
J., Winchester,
C. F., Campbell,
L. E. and J. C. Webb.
Effects of loud sounds on the physiology
and behavior
of swine.
U. S. Department
of Agriculture,
Agricultural
Research
Service Technical
Bulletin,
No. 1280.
Borisova, M. K.
The effect
activity
of animals.
!.
E. p_vlova,
of noise
Zhurnal
on the conditioned
reflex
Vysshei Deiatel'
nosti Im
196o, 1_71=9._----
.....
Brzezinska,
Z.
Changes
in aoetyleholine
concentration
in
cerebral
tissue in rats repeatedly
exposed
to the
action of mechanical
vibration.
Acta Ph[slolegica
Polonica,
1968, 19, 810-815.
Casady_
R. B. and Lehmann,
R. P.
Responses
of farm animals
to sonic booms.
Sonic boom experiments
at Edwards
Air Force Base.
National
Sonic Boom Evaluation
Office
Interim Report,
N8 BE-l-S7
of 28 July
1967.
Annex H.
Casady,
R. B. and Lehmann,
R. P. Responses
of farm animals
to sonic booms, Sonic boom experiments
at Edwards
Air Force Base.
Annex H. U. S. Department
of Agriculture,
Agricultural
Research
Service,
Animal Husbandry
Research
Division,
Beltsville,
Maryland,
20 September
1966.
Committee
on the Problem
of Noise.
Final Report.
Presented
to Parliament
July 1963.
London:
Her Majesty's
Stationery
Office, Cmnd. 2056, 19s bd. net.
Conti,
A. and Borgo, M.
Behaviour
of cytochreme
activity
in the cochlea of the guinea pig
acoustic
stimulation.
AgtaOto-Laryn$olo_ica
1964, 58, 321-330.
oxidase
following
,
Covell,
W. P.
Histologic
changes in the organ of Corti
intense sound.
Journal of Comparative
Neurology,
1953,
99,
43-59.
with
68
Crummett,
J. G.
Acoustic
information
denial
as a means
for
vertebrate
pest control.
Paper
presented
at the 80th
meeting
of the Acoustical
Society
of America,
Houston,
November,
1970.
Cummings,
W. C.
Gray
whales
avoid
sounds
of killer
Fishery
Bulletin,
July,
1971
(in press).
Cutkomp,
L. _.
insects.
Research
Davis,
P.
Raven's
response
1967,
60, 370.
Diehl,
Fred
P.
Sound
1969,
37, 36-44.
Dooling,
R. J., Mulligan,
J. A. and J. D. Miller.
of auditory
sensitivity
and song
spectrum
common
canary.
Journal
of the Acoustical
America,
(in press
.-_
Elbowioz-Waniewska,
acoustic
process.
362-370.
F A
O
Fish,
whales.
Effects
of ultrasonic
energy
on storage
Agriculture
Department
Cooperative
State
Service,
Minnesota,
1969.
and
as
a
to
sonic
rodent
hang.
deterrent.
British
Pest
Birds,
Control,
Relation
for the
Society
of
Z.
Investigations
on the influence
ultraacoustie
field
on biochemical
Acta
Phys!ologica
Polonica,
1962,
of
13,
Fisheries
Report
No. 76.
Report
on a meeting
for
consultations
on underwater
noise.
Food
and
Agriculture
Organization
of the United
Nations,
April,
1970.
J. F. and Vania,
J. S.
Killer
whale,
Orcinus
orea,
sounds
repel
white
whales,
Delphlnapterus
leucas.
Fishery
Bulletin,
July,
197[.
Fitch,
J. E. and Young,
P. H.
Use and effect
of
in California
coastal
waters.
California
Game t 1948, 34,
53-70.
Fitzwater,
W. D.
1970,
38,
Sonic
9-16.
systems
for
Friedman,
M., Byers,
S. 0. and A. E.
responses
of rats
and rabbits
American
Journal
o_f Phys%olo_y,
Fringe,
H. and Fringe,
M.
Recorded
as attractants
and repellents.
Management,
1957,
21, 91.
bird
control.
explosions
Fish
and
Pest
Control,
Brown.
Plasma
lipid
to an auditory
stimulus.
212,
1174-1178,
1967.
calls
of the eastern
Journal
o__Wildlife
crow
69
Frings,
H. and Frings,
aspera
(Diptera:
t--q_-_tomological
M.
Rsactions
of swarms
of Pentaneura
Tendipedidae)
to SOUnd.
Annals
of
Society
of Amqrica,
1959,--'5n/r,
7-'2_-733.
Frings,
I{. and Jumber,
J.
Preliminary
studies
on the use of
a specific
sound
to repel
starlings
(Sturnus
vulgarIs)
from
objectionable
roosts.
Science,
_'g_i_9_9.
Frings,
H. and Little,
F.
to simple
sounds.
Geber,
W. F., Anderson,
T. A. and Van Dyne,
B.
Physiologic
response
of the albino
rat to chronic
noise
stress.
Archives
o__ Environmental
Health,
1966,
12, 751-784.
Reactions
Science,
of honey
1957,
125,
Gonzalez,
G., Miller,
N. and Istre,
rocket
noise
upon
hearing
in
Medicine,
1970,
41, 21-25.
Graham,
F.
Ear
pollution.
bees
122.
in
tile hive
C., Jr.
Influence
of
guinea
pigs.
Aerospace
Audubon,
1969,
71,
34-39.
Greaves,
J. H. and Rowe,
F. P.
Responses
of confined
rodent
populations
to an ultrasound
generator.
Journal
of
_[ildlife
Management,
1969, 33, 409-417.
Griffin,
D. R.,
resistance
Zoology
,
Groh,
Herein,
Hill_
McCue,
J. J. G. and
Grinnell,
of bats
to jamming.
Journal
1963,
152, 229-250.
A. D.
The
o_f Ex_e<i_}ental
L. S.
The effects
of two litter
sizes
and two
levels
of noise
during
infancy
upon
the adult
behavior
of
the white
rat.
Dissertation
Abstraqts,
1965,
27,
598-599.
H.
The
death
of
birds.
E. P.
Bat control
with
Control,
1970,
38,
18.
Envlronment,
high
frequency
1969,
sound.
Hiroshige,
T.,
Sato,
T., Ohta,
R. and
Itoh,
S.
cortlcotropin-releasing
activity
in the
following
noxious
stimuli.
The Japanese
Physiolog[,
1969,
19_
II,
S1
Pes__t
Increase
of
rat hypothalamus
Journal
of
866-87_7
Hrubes,
V.
Changes
in concentration
acids
in the rat plasm_
after
Superior,
1964,
6, 60-62.
Hruhes,
V. and Benes,
V.
The
influence
stress
on rats.
Acta
Biologica
1965,
15,
592-596.
"
of non-esterified
load.
Activitas
fatty
Nervosa
of repeated
noise
et Medica
C_.rmanica,
7O
Ishii,
0., Takahashi,
T. and Balogh, K.
Glycogen
in the
inner ear after acoustic stimulation.
Acta OtoLaryngologioa,
1969,
67,
573-582.
--_
Ishii,
H. and Yokobori,
K.
Experimental
studies on teratogenic
activity
of noise stimulation.
Gunma Journal
of
_le_dical Sciences,
1960, 9, 153-16-_.
Jeannoutot,
D. W. and Adal_, J. L.
Progesterone
versus
treatment
by high intensity
sound as methods
of
controlling
broodiness
in broad breasted
bronze
turkeys.
Poultry
Science,
1961, 40, 512-521.
Jensen,
M. M. and Rasmussen,
A. F.
Audiogenie
stress and
susceptibility
to infection.
Physiological
Effects
of Noise,
B. L. Welch and A. S.-'-_E_.)_-_97_,
_=i .77----
Jurtshuk,
P., Weltman,
A. S. and Sackler,
A. M.
Biochemical
response
of rats to auditory
stress.
Selence,
1959,
129, 1424-1425.
Kirkpatrick,
R. L.
reproduction
by exposure
Entomology,
and Harein,
P. K.
Inhibition
of
of Indlan-Meal
Moths, Plodia interpunotella,
to amplified
sound.
Journ-'_Of
Economic
1965, 58, 920-921.
Klein,
D. R.
Reaction
of reindeer
to obstructions
disturbanoes.
Science , 1971, 173, 393-398.
Konishi,
Masakazu.
Comparative
neurophysiological
studies
of hearing
and vocalizations
in songbirds.
Zeitsehrift
fuer Ver_leiqhende
Ph_siologie,
19TO, 67, 36_L381.
Langowski,
D. J., Wight,
of instrumentally
acoustic
stimuli.
1969,
33,
669-677.
and
H. M. and Jacobsen,
J. N.
Responses
conditioned
starlings
to aversive
Journal
of Wildlife
Management,
_"
Lawrence,
M. and Yantis, P.
Individual
differences
in
functional
recovery
and structural
repair following
overstimulatlon
of the guinea pig.
Annals of Otology,
Rhinology,
and Laryn_ology,
1957, 66, 595-6_"/.
Lindgren,
D. L.
Maintaining
marketability
of stored grain
and cereal products.
Agriculture
Department
Cooperative
State Research
Service,
California,
1969.
Lindzey,
G.
Emotionality
and audiogenic
seizure susceptibility
in five inbred strains
of mice.
Journal of
Comparative
and Physiqloglcal
Psyc_gy,-_951,
44,
389--393.
71
Little,
H. F.
Reactions
known
frequency.
of honey
Anatomical
bees
to oscillations
RecoPd,
1959,
134,
Majeau-Chargois,
D. A., Berlin,
C. I.
Sonic
boom
effects
on the organ
Laryngoscope,
1970,
80, 620-630.
Malar,
T. and Kleerekoper,
of sound
intensity
goldfish.
American
_nley,
Geoffrey.
Comparative
in reptiles.
Zeitschrift
1970,
67, 363-_-81.
Messersmlth,
D. H.
Control
Department
Cooperative
NL%ryland,
1970.
Miline,
and
of
G. D.
Corti.
H.
Observations
on
on locomotor
patterns
Zoologist,
1968,
8,
of
studies
rue<
bird
State
of
GO1.
Whitehouse.
T1_e
some
effects
of naive
741-742.
of auditory
Vergleichende
physiology
Physiologie,
depredation.
Agriculture
Research
Service,
R.,
Deveoerskl,
V. and R. Krstic.
Effects
of
stimuli
on the pineal
gland
of the bat
during
hibernation.
Acta
Anatomica,
1969,
73,
Suppl.
293-300.
56,
Miller,
J.
D.,
Rothenberg,
S.
J.
and
Eldredge,
Preliminary
observations
on the effects
to noise
for seven
days
on the
hearing
ear
of the chinchilla.
The
Journal
of
Society
of America
(in pr--_s_-?.
Miller,
J. D., Watson,
C. S. and Covell,
W. P.
Deafening
effects
of noise
on the cat.
Aet a Oto-laryn_0!ogica,
Suppl.
176,
1963,
91 pp.
Monaenkov,
A. M.
Influence
sound
of an electric
activity
in
6, 891-897,
D.
of
and
the
auditory
H.
exposure
inner
Acoustical
of prolonged
stimulation
bell
on conditioned-reflex
by
mammals.
Zhur.
Vyssh.
Nervn.
Deltal'
1956.
Psyc--_og±cal
Abstracts,-'-_/---j1958.
Monastyrskaya,
B. I., Prakh'e,
I. B.,
and Khaunina,
R. A.
Effect
of acoustic
stimulation
on the
pituitary
adrenal
system
in healthy
rats
and rats
genetically
sensitive
to sound.
Bulletin
of Experimental
Biology
_nd
Medicine
(transl.-'_-_ss.),
1969,
68,
i_-60.
Ogle,
C. W. and
physical
1966,
36,
Lookett,
hormone
281-290.
M. F.
T.he rclease
by sound.
Journal
of neurohypoo__fEndocrinolog_,
Oslntseva,
V. P., Pushkina,
N. N.,
Bonashevskaya,
Kaverina,
V. F.
Noise
induced
changes
in
H_giene
and Sanitation,
1969,
34,
147-151.
T.
the
I., and
adrenals.
72
Parker,
J. B. and Bayley, N. D.
Investigations
on effects
of aircraft
sound on milk production
of dairy
cattle,
1957-1958.
United States
Department
of
Agriculture,
Agriculture
Research
Service,
Animal
Husbandry
Research
Division,
1960, 22 pp.
Pearson, E. W., Sken, P. R. and Corner, G. W.
Dispersal
of
urban roosts with records of starling
distress
calls.
Journal of Wildlife
Management,
1967, 31, 502-506.
Peters,
E. N.
Temporary
shifts
in auditory
chinchilla
after exposure
to noise.
the Accoustical
Soeiet_
of America,
thresholds
of
The Journal of
_-_,--_7_1----_33.
Poche,
L. B., Stoekwell,
C. W. and Ades, H.
Cochlear hair
cell damage in guinea pigs after exposure
to impulse
noise.
The Journal of the Acoustical
Society of
Ponomar'kov,
V. I., Tysik, Yu, Kidryavtseva,
V. I., Barer,
A. S., Kostin, V. K., Leshchenko,
V. Ye., Morozova,
R. M., Nesokin,
L. V., Frolov, A. N.
NASA TT F-529i,
"Problems
of Space Biology,"
Vol. 7, Operational
Activity,
Problems
of Habitability
and Biotechnology,
NASA, May 1969.
Potash,
Pye,
L. M.
A signal
detection
problem
and possible
solution
in Japanese
quail.
Aniuh%l
Behavior
(in press).
.L
J. Do
Ultrasonic
bioacoustics,
Final Scientific
Report,
llth Ma M 1965 - 30th June, 1970.
U.S.
Government
Research
and Reports
Index 1971, No. i, p. SU-2, No.
AD 714 632
Sewell,
Shaw,
G. D.
Ultrasonic
1970,
8, 26-30.
signals
from
rodents.
Ultrasonics,
E. _.
California
Condor.
Library of Congress
Legislative
Reference
Service,
1970, SK3SI, 70-127.
Shulev,
A. S.
Acoustic
responses
of locusts--Schistocera,
Dociostarus,
and Aerotylus.
U. S. Dept of Agriculture,
Agricultural
Research
Service,
Entomology
Research
Division,
1969.
Singh,
K. B. and Rao, P.
Studies
on the
of rats under continuous
auditory
Journal Obstetrics
and Gynecology,
Sprock,
C. M., Howar_ W. E., and Jacob, F. C.
Sound as a
deterrent
to rats and mice.
Journal of Wildlife
_nagement,
1967, 31, 729-741.
'
--
polycystlc
ovaries
stress.
American
1970, 10_-_'_64.
73
Stadeln_n,
W. J.
The effect
of sounds
on hatehability
of chicken
egg.
1958a,
37,
16G-169.
of varying
intensity
Poultry
Science,
Stadelman,
W. J.
Observations
with
growing
chickens
the effects
of sounds
of varying
intensities.
Poultry
Science,
1958b,
37, 776-779.
Thompson,
R. D., Grant,
C. V., Pearson,
Cardiac
response
of starlings
to
lighting
and grouping.
American
1968a,
214,
41-44.
Thompson,
R. D., Grant,
C. V., Pearson,
E. W., and Corner,
Differential
heart
rate
response
of starlings
to
sound
stimuli
of biological
origin.
The Journal
of
Wildlife
Management,
1968b,
32, 888-8_.
Thompson,
W. D. and Sontag,
L. W.
Behavioral
effects
in the
offspring
of rats
subjected
to audiogenic
seizures
during
the gestational
period.
Journal
of Comparative
and Phzsiologic_l
Psychqlo_y,
19_-_'g_4-45S.
Thorpe,
W. H.
The significance
of vocal
animals
with
special
reference
to
Biologica
Experimentia,
1969,
29,
Travis,
H. R._ Richardson,
G. V., Menear,
J. R. and Bond,
J.
The
effects
of simulated
sonic
booms
on reproduction
and
behavior
of farm-ralsed
mink.
ASS 44-200,
June
1968,
U. S. Department
of Agriculture,
Agricultural
Research
Service.
Treptow,
K.
Dynamics
of
exposure
to noise.
8, 215-216.
Tsao,
and Corner,
G.
effects
of
of Physiology,
States
impact
1969,
Department
of the Big
155 pp.
glycemic
reactions
Activitas
Nervqsa
Vinos,
M. A.
Artificial
embryos.
An!_.l
of the
Cypress
G.
imitation
in
birds.
Aeta
251-269.
:
after
repeated
Superior,
1966,
C.
Perception
and
behavioral
effects
of sound
in the
Indian-Meal
Moth.
U. S. Dept.
of Agriculture,
Agriculture
Research
Service,
_rket
Quality
Research
Division,
1969.
United
Ward,
E. W.,
sound:
Journal
on
Interior.
Environmental
Swamp
Jetport.
September,
acceleration
of hatching
in
Behavior,
1966,
14, 389-394.
C. 0., Barletta,
M. A., K_ye,
T.
Teratogenie
of audiogenie
stress
in albino
mice.
Journal
Pharmaceutical
Sc%ences,
1970,
59,
166"_-_-
quail
effects
of
W.
W.
74
Ward,
W. D.
and Nelson,
D. A.
Reduction
of permanent
threshold
shifts
through
interlaittency.
Paper
presented
at the SOth meeting
of the Acoustical
Society
of America,
Houston,
November,
1970.
Werner,
R.
Influence
of sound
on the intermediary
lobe
of the rat hypophysis.
Compte
Rendus
de l'Association
des Anatomistes,
1959,
4_-7_-788.
Wight,
H. M.
Development
and testing
repelling
starlings
that roost
State
Government,
1971.
Yeakel,
E. H.,
Shenkin,
H. A.,
Adrenaleetomy
and blood
to auditory
stimulation.
155,
118-127.
Zondek,
B.
Effect
of auditory
stimuli
organs.
New England
Obstetrical
Society,
1964_
18, 177-185.
Zondek,
B. and
Isachar,
T.
Effect
of audiogsnic
stimulation
on genital
function
and reproduction.
Acta
Endocrlnologica,
1964,
45, 227-234.
Zoric_
V.
Effects
of
1959,
38,
176.
sound
on
Of
in
methods
holly.
for
Oregon
Rothballer,
A. B.,
McCann,
S.
pressure
of rats
subjected
Journal
of Physiology,
1948,
mouse
on female
reproductive
and Gynecological
testes.
Acta
Anatomlca,
M.