Response of Arthropods to the Anthropogenic Noise at Sandur, Ballari, Karnataka

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4961555/v1

Arthropod diversity and species richness in the Sandur taluk Ballari have been recorded. One hundred and ninety-two species of insects were identified, and about 80% of them were beneficial to the ecosystem as natural enemies of pests, pollinators, decomposers, and scavengers; they regulate the ecosystem functioning. The rich biodiversity suggests that the study area is of high biological value and that the species are endemic to the eastern plains of Karnataka. It is observed that the abundance of arthropods varied in different habitats based on the anthropogenic noise. It is observed that the abundance of the arthropods decreased, and although the cricket calling pattern remained the same in all the habitats, the external sound masked the cricket calls. The masking and overlapping effects of cricket and grasshopper calls may manifest in differential ecological impacts.

Anthropogenic noise

sound level

insects

species richness

shift in activity

Arthropods are the most extensive grouping of animals, all with jointed legs and an exoskeleton made of chitin. Arthropods comprise most of the earth's biodiversity (Harisha et al.,2013). Arthropods play a significant role in the food web and ecosystem services like pollination, seed dispersal, decomposition, and part of the food chains (Bunkley, 2017). Arthropods create a biological foundation for the entire terrestrial ecosystem. In nutrient cycles, pollinating the plants, seed dispersal, soil fertility, and structure provide food sources for other taxa. These insects are of great importance as a food source for diverse predators (Carpenter, 1928) and play an essential role in maintaining the health of ecosystems; they provide livelihoods and nutrition to the human community and are important indicators of environmental change. Under natural conditions, insects are a prime factor in regulating the abundance, especially flowering plants. Approximately 85% of angiosperms are pollinated by insects (Grimaldi & Engel, 2005).

Due to Urbanization and the associated activities, arthropods face many unique threats by altering their sensory environments (Leticia Classen-Rodrı´guez, 2021). Changes in the landscape, habitat fragmentation, loss of host plant community, light pollution, and noise pollution are significant phenomena that impact the arthropods. The change in the usual environment may cause a severe impact on communication efficacy, which is one of the most critical factors to the animals, particularly for reproductive success, as they communicate to defend territories, warn, approach predators, and attract mates (Costello & Symes, 2014). It has been proven that anthropogenic noise alters the behavior and distribution of animals in aquatic environments (Nowacek, Thorne et al., 2007)—and the terrestrial environment (Jessie Buckley et al., 2017).

Assessing the rate and extent of disturbance involves carefully measuring characteristics of the sound source, such as duration (chronic, intermittent), frequency content, and intensity (Nowacek et al., 2007; Southall et al., 2007; Francis & Barber, 2013). Nevertheless, attempts to understand the impact of sound on animals are inevitable as they play an essential role in the ecosystem. The effects of louder soundscapes on insects also conversely cause changes in other animals dependent on insects for their dietary requirements, e.g., bats, birds, and rodents.

We investigated any changes in the distribution and abundance of terrestrial arthropods and the community structure at the landscape scale that might be impacted or altered by the surrounding noise. Thus, considering the ecological importance of arthropods, it is essential to determine the effects of noise and its impacts.

The study evaluated the impact of anthropogenic pressures on the arthropods in the Donimalai and Swamimalai block of Sandur ranges in Sandur Taluk, Ballari District of Karnataka, between June and August 2021. Sandur Taluk is a mining hub in Karnataka; the mining sector has led to Urbanization in this area. Hence, the land use of this area has changed periodically over the years. Urbanization includes constructing roads, improving transportation facilities, and over-exploiting natural resources. Sandur has an average elevation of 565 m asl (above MSL) and a tropical savannah climate. Rocky mountains surround it and have forest types of tropical dry deciduous, southern thorny, open scrub, and mixed deciduous types. A part of the Deccan plateau forms the eastern plains of Karnataka; this landscape has experienced over 69 years of intensive disturbance (sander manganese and iron ores 2021), which leads to significant alterations in the landscape Even further leads to the overlap in the everyday wellbeing of the wildlife. We identified all the land use types in the study area and segregated them into forest areas, agricultural areas, built-up areas, open scrublands, and water bodies. The anthropogenic pressures such as noise and its source, light, and its sources are identified and considered in the Conveyor belt, which is 24 Km from Nandihalli to Vijayanagara steel plant, as the significant source of noise in the study area and focused on the impact of that noise on the arthropod.

Methods such as,

Visual counting

A 200 m line transect was laid on both sides of the conveyor belt, perpendicularly on both sides in all four major habitat types. On each line transect, the sampling of 200 m was done in discrete transect lines of 10 m each (0–10, 20–30, 40–50, 60–70, 80–90, 100–110, 120–130, 140–150, 160–170, 180–190 m) On each of these discrete lines, the arthropods were counted and also recorded the noise level using a handheld sound meter.

Sticky trap technique

16 blue and yellow sticky traps (10X12) inches were deployed at 1 m and 3 m from the ground at 20 m and 120 m from the conveyor belt. Sticky traps were deployed in all the habitats of the study area, and each trap was kept for ten days in each location. Observations were taken every two days on different insects trapped. Traps were cleaned and re-installed at daily intervals.

LED Light trap

Solar LED traps were deployed at 0m and 100 m from the conveyor belt. Each trap was kept in a sampling location for ten days and then shifted to another sampling location. During the sampling, each trap was visited on alternative days, and all the species were cleaned in the trap and redeployed in the exact location.

Recording the bio-acoustics

Passive sound recorders, like audio moths and sound monitoring stations, were deployed randomly in all the habitats. Sound recorders and audio moths were kept in an on position to record the calls for 12 hours from evening 6 to morning 6, and the sound monitoring stations were kept for 30 days in each habitat. After three days of deployments, the recorder was removed, and all the recordings recorded calls were processed and analyzed using Raven Pro 1.6 and Bat Explorer 2.1.9 software.

Data analysis:

We have calculated the abundance using the Total number of individual species, / Total number of points in which they occurred, Standard deviation, ANOVA, Pearson correlation, and t-test using SPSS software version 16.0. We have also calculated the Species diversity index and Shannon-Wiener's index using PAST software. Overlap curves are plotted using R-Studio Version 1.4.1717.

All methods recorded 192 species of arthropods belonging to 15 orders, 46 families, and 73 genera during the study. Seven species are listed as 'Least Concern' under the IUCN list.

Visual count: About 95 species were recorded by the visual count method on transect lines at different distances from the conveyor at different habitats, the occurrence of the species at perpendicular distances from 0m to 200 m. The Shannon-Wiener Simpson index for species diversity of insect species at different distances from the conveyor is given in Table 1

Table 1: Species diversity indices (Visual counting) according to perpendicular distance from the conveyor.

Species diversity indices
Distance from conveyor	0-10	20-30	40-50	60-70	80-90	100-110	120-130	140-150	160-170	180-190
Taxa_S	58	59	63	66	68	71	66	68	75	69
Individuals	607	593	523	612	634	673	684	566	689	791
Dominance_D	0.12	0.10	0.11	0.10	0.08	0.07	0.08	0.07	0.07	0.08
Simpson_1-D	0.88	0.90	0.89	0.90	0.92	0.93	0.92	0.93	0.93	0.92
Shannon_H	2.98	3.20	3.16	3.22	3.34	3.43	3.28	3.41	3.45	3.31
Evenness_e^H/S	0.34	0.41	0.38	0.38	0.41	0.43	0.40	0.45	0.42	0.40

The insect diversity indices were worked out at different distances from the conveyor (Table 1). The diversity of insect species varied from 0 m to 200 m. The Simpson diversity index value was 0.88 at 0 points, and diversity at 160 points was high at 0.93. As the Shannon index value at 0 m distance, diversity was 2.99 and varied little as we went away; at the 160th point, it recorded high diversity (3.447) and 3.31 at 180-190 m.

Abundance: The mean number of arthropod species varied between 20 and 35. The mean number of arthropod species was higher at distances from the conveyor.

The mean number of arthropod species varied between 20 and 35 (Fig. 1a). The mean number of arthropod species was higher at distances away from the conveyor. The mean number of insect species varied significantly among different distances from the conveyor. As given below in agriculture habitat (F9,50= 2.208, p < 0.01) in scrub (F9,50= 3.955, p < 0.01), built-up area (F9,50= 2.099, p < 0.01), and did not vary in forest habitat (F9,50 =2.853, p = 0.09) However, the overall mean number (samples pooled) of insect counts highly varied among the different distances from the conveyor (F9,230=8.813, p < 0.01). The differences between the mean numbers of arthropods were minor in all the habitat types. However, the overall mean number of insect species was much higher away from the conveyor belt.

The sound in decibels was recorded for every sampling sector at the perpendicular distance to the conveyor. The relationship of the number of insects with the mean sound in decibels was developed for all the habitat types and the overall means. As the sound decreased away from the conveyor, the number of insects recorded increased in the forest (rp= -0.723, df=9, p=0.01), scrub (rp= -0.937, df=9, p>0.01) in built-up (rp= - 0.783, df=9, p>0.00) and in agriculture field (rp=-0.909,df=9, p>0.01). However, the overall mean number of species of arthropods increased at a perpendicular distance to the conveyor as the intensity sound decreased (Fig. 1 b) E: rp= - 0.808, df=9, p < 0.01).

Sticky traps

The mean number of muscoid flies (t= 0.145, df=78, p=0.885)and aphids(t= 0.787, df = 78,p=0.433)did not vary between different habitats at the distance of 20 m and 120 m from the conveyor belt. However, the mean number of muscoid flies did not vary significantly (t= 0.231, df=78, p=0.818) in Fig 2.

Solar traps

Table 2 Mean number of insects attracted to the solar traps

Species	0m distance		100 m distance	Statistical value
Termites	10.46+11.82	34.95 +12.82		t= 8.73,df=34, p<0.01
Muscoid flies	13.40+5.84	15.65+6.18		t=9.70,df=34,p<0.01
Flesh flies	1.33+1.54	11.45+7.03		t=6.40,df=34,p<0.00
Root grub	1.60+1.68	2.25+3.53		t=1.24,df=34,p=0.22
Brown Beetle	0.00+0.00	4.00+2.61		t=5.98,df=34,p=3.93
Black Beetle	2.87+2.38	3.20+3.66		t=-.12,df=32,p=0.90
Silver moth	3.26+3.71	5.90+4.50		t=2.67,df=34,p< 0.01
Snout moth	1.13+1.18	5.00+2.10		t=.069,df=34,p=1.68
Geomitredea sp.	0.06+0.25	2.75+2.12		t=4.87,df=34,p<0.01
Aemene	1.46+1.18	2.85+2.36		t=4.20,df=34,p<0.01
Chiasmia moth	0.20+0.56	1.00+1.02		t=-1.74,df=34,p=0.09
Musquito	0.53+0.91	0.40+.68		t=-1.89,df = 33,p =0.06
Brown stink bug	6.73+3.39	3.25+2.24		t=3.64,df = 34, p <0.01
Red cotton bug	0.00+0.00	2.95+2.39		t=2.41,df = 34, p <0.01
Horse fly	1.20+1.32	1.80+1.36		t=2.33,df = 34, p <0.01
Green stink bug	0.00+0.00	5.35+3.57		t=5.20,df=34,p<0.00
Sawfly	0.00+0.00	3.50+2.64		t=4.45,df=34,p<0.00
Water bugs	2.13+1.68	2.80+2.78		t=3.30,df=34,p<0.00
Honey bee	8.33+4.59	5.25+5.91		t=3.44,df=34,p<0.00
Potter wasp	0.26+0.59	0.50+.88		t=3.30,df=34,p<0.00
Black wasp	0.06+0.25	0.30+.57		t=3.44,df=34,p<0.00
Tree hopper	0.73+0.88	0.20+.52		t=-1.82,df=34,p=0.07
leaf hopper	1.00+1.81	2.55+1.76		t=-1.01,df=34,p=0.31
Earwig	1.33+2.02	1.25+1.94		t=-3.29,df =34 p< 0.00
corn borer	1.30+1.38	1.25+1.94		t=-1.38,df =34,p= 0.17
Aphids	0.00+0.00	1.30+1.38		t=-2.01, df =33,p< 0.01
Sphingidae moth	0.00+0.00	0.00+0.00		t=-2.33,df = 34,p<0.01
Green grasshopper	0.00+0.00	0.00+0.00		t=-2.01,df =33, p< 0.01
Long-horned moth	0.00+0.00	0.00+0.00		t=-2.33, df =34,p<0.01
Water bugs	0.00+0.00	0.00+0.00		t=-3.84,df =34,p<.001

The mean number of insects attracted to the solar traps varied between 24 and 30, at 0 m and 100m distance from the CONVEYOR in Phase 1 (Table 2). The root grub, Brown beetle, Black beetle, Snout Moth, Chiasmia moth, Mosquito, Treehopper, Leaf hopper, and European corn borer were not varied. At the same time, other insects varied significantly at distances of 0 m and 100 m.

Bioacoustic method:

The activity of crickets:

The sound of the conveyor masks them. The calls of Orthopnoea sp are shown in green, and the CONVEYOR sound is shown in yellow and orange. In the Figure 3 the x-axis indicates the frequency, the Y-axis indicates the duration of the call, and the x-axis indicates the amplitude at which the call is.

Fig. 4 depicts the spectrogram resulting from the sound monitoring station. The orthopterans, including crickets and grasshoppers, have peak frequencies of 23.37 kHz and 21.64 kHz, respectively, overlapping with the sound of CONVEYOR, which has frequencies of 5.0 to 35.o KHz.

One hundred and ninety-two species of insects were identified; most of the species are endemic to the eastern plains of Karnataka, regulating ecosystem function. Except in agriculture, species richness and abundance increased as the distance from the conveyor increased. Although the sound intensity gradually decreases perpendicular to the conveyor and the relationship between the arthropod species' richness and their abundance is negative, that only indicates that some avoidance of the conveyor belt area them. However, it is not easy to provide a rationale for the same as the conveyor is situated at the forest's edge, and the plant species composition is different. Furthermore, agricultural practice also plays a role in determining the species richness and abundance; thus, conclusions based on the single-season data must be corrected. Thus, long-term observations and planned studies are required to develop the relationship between community turnover and sound in determining the community composition and structure (Bunkley et al., 2016).

The species richness and abundance of insects collected from the sticky trap showed no difference between 0m and 100m distances. However, variation in aphid numbers between both phases may be attributed to the diurnal activity of aphids (Sonya & Broughton, 2012). However, the number of insects trapped in the solar traps between phase-1 and phase-2 at 0 and 100 m distance them from the conveyor difference in abundance by a few species. However, many insects trapped were diurnal, and only a few were nocturnal.

Although the cricket calling pattern remains the same in all the habitats, there is a shift of a few hours of late activity and the peaking of their activity. There was a small period during peak calling activity when there was no overlap in the sound produced by the belt and the calling sound of the crickets (Slabbekoorn et al., 2010). Many studies have shown the impact of sound on the acoustic communication of the animal; however, studies on the impact of the conveyor on orthopterans are incipient here (Duarte et al., 2019). The masking and overlapping effects of cricket and grasshopper calls may manifest in differential ecological impacts. For instance, it may interfere with the mating and reproduction of crickets. The opposite sexes locate each other acoustically. If this communication medium is disrupted, it will adversely affect the mating and reproduction of crickets. Similar would be the situation of other sound-producing insects, which constitute the prey base for higher taxa animals. The amphibian reptiles, birds, and other mammal predators will be adversely affected as they will take more time to locate and search for prey. In the process, they will be exposed to harsh environmental situations. This, in turn, will adversely affect the top consumers in the ecosystem. This is because birds and small mammals serve as a prey base for these animals. Earlier studies conducted by (Schmidt and Balakrishnan2015) have also revealed similar consequences of sound produced by anthropogenic infrastructure in Austria. Thus, if the population of crickets and grasshoppers declines in the patch, it would disrupt the ecosystem.

One hundred and ninety-two species of arthropods were identified and documented in four different habitats in the study area in Sandur taluk of Bellary, of which Lepidoptera was the dominant group of insects recorded. About 80% of insects identified were known to play a significant role in the ecosystem as pollinators, predators, parasites, decomposers, scavengers, and material and energy turnovers. Thus, the study area is of high conservation and biodiversity value. As the distance from the conveyor increased, the sound decreased, and the insect abundance and species richness increased. Cricket calls are affected when the sound produced by the conveyor masks their calls. This might lead to different ecological and behavioral implications for the cricket and their predators. Even though there was not much difference in the abundance and species richness of insects between all the habitats, it may affect the diversity significantly.

Funding:

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors."

Author Contribution

K.K.B. conceptualized and designed the study, conducted fieldwork, analyzed the data, and drafted the manuscript and revisions. H.K. contributed to fieldwork and data analysis, A.K.C. provided guidance on the experimental design, contributed to the writing and editing of the manuscript, and supervised the entire research process. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Bayne, EM., Habib, L. and Boutin, S. (2008). Impacts of anthropogenic noise from energy‐sector activity on the abundance of songbirds in the boreal forest. Conservation Biology, 22(5), pp.1186-1193.
Brumm, H. and Slabbekoorn, H. (2005). Acoustic communication in noise. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 35, pp.151-209.
Bunkley, J., McClure, C.J., Kawahara, A.Y., Francis, C.D. & Barber, J.R. (2017). Anthropogenic noise changes arthropod abundances. Ecology and Evolution, 7(9), 2977–2985.
Costello, R.A. and Symes, L.B. (2014). Effects of anthropogenic noise on male signaling behavior and female phonotaxis in Oecanthus tree crickets. Animal Behaviour, 95, pp.15-22.
Drosopoulos, S., & Claridge, M. F. (Eds.) (2005). Insect sounds and communication: physiology, behavior, ecology, and evolution. CRC Press.
Duarte, M.H., Caliari, E.P., Scarpelli, M.D., Lobregat, G.O., Young, R.J. and Sousa-Lima, R.S. (2019). Effects of mining truck traffic on cricket calling activity. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 146(1), pp.656-664.
Francis, C. D., & Barber, J. R. (2013). A framework for understanding noise impacts on wildlife: an urgent conservation priority. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 11(6), 305–313.
Gotelli, N.J. & Colwell, R.K. (2011). Estimating species richness. Biological diversity: frontiers in measurement and assessment, 12(39-54), p.35.
Heinz, K.M., Parrella, M.P. & Newman, J.P. (1992). Time-efficient use of yellow sticky traps in monitoring insect populations. Journal of Economic Entomology, 85(6), 2263–2269.
McLaughlin, K.E. & Kunc, H.P. (2013). Experimentally increased noise levels change spatial and singing behavior. Biology Letters, 9(1), 20120771.
Morley, E.L., Jones, G. and Radford, A.N. (2014). The importance of invertebrates when considering the impacts of anthropogenic noise. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 281(1776), 20132683.
Price, B. (2016). NightLife: A cheap, robust, LED-based light trap for collecting aquatic insects in remote areas. Biodiversity Data Journal, (4).
Romer, H. and Lewald, J. (1992). High-frequency sound transmission in natural habitats: implications for the evolution of insect acoustic communication. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 29(6), pp.437-444.
Schmidt, A.K. and Balakrishnan, R. (2015). Ecology of audio signaling and the problem of masking interference in insects. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 201(1), pp.133-142.
Slabbekoorn, H., Yeh, P. and Hunt, K. (2007). Sound transmission and song divergence: a comparison of urban and forest acoustics. The Condor, 109(1), pp.67-78.
Nott, A., & Holtman, I. (2023). Genetic insights into immune mechanisms of Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease. Frontiers in Immunology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1168539
Bunkley, J. P., McClure, C. J. W., Kawahara, A. Y., Francis, C. D., & Barber, J. R. (2017). Anthropogenic noise changes arthropod abundances. Ecology and Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.2698
Niu, F., Yang, Y., Xue, R., Zhou, Z., & Chen, S. (2020). Behavioral Responses by Captive Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) to 15- to 50-kHz Tonal Signals. Aquatic Mammals, 46(1), 1-10.
Brito, L. D. J. M. D., & Silva, P. V. (2024). Monitoramento passivo bioacústico como método para investigar a poluição sonora em parques urbanos. https://doi.org/10.14295/bjs.v3i1.440
Niu, F., Yang, Y., Xue, R., Zhou, Z., & Chen, S. (2020). Behavioral Responses by Captive Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) to 15- to 50-kHz Tonal Signals. Aquatic Mammals, 46(1), 1-10.

No competing interests reported.

Supplymentaryreport.docx

Response of Arthropods to the Anthropogenic Noise at Sandur, Ballari, Karnataka

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methods

Data analysis:

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Declarations

Funding:

Author Contribution

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1