Journal of Marine Science: Research & Development
Open Access

Anthropogenic submerged noise; Tidal energy devices; Marine mammals; Listening spaces; Ecological context

Introduction

Anthropogenic activities in the marine environment, such as shipping, construction, and resource extraction, have led to a significant increase in underwater noise levels over recent decades. This noise pollution poses a threat to the sensitive auditory systems of marine mammals, which rely heavily on sound for communication, navigation, and foraging. With the urgent need to transition towards renewable energy sources, tidal energy has gained traction as a promising alternative to fossil fuels. Tidal energy devices harness the kinetic energy of tides to generate electricity, offering a clean and reliable source of power. However, the installation and operation of these devices introduce anthropogenic noise into marine ecosystems, potentially disrupting the acoustic habitats of marine mammals. Understanding the ecological context of this submerged noise is crucial for assessing its impacts on marine mammal populations and informing sustainable energy development strategies. This study investigates the effects of tidal energy devices on marine mammal listening spaces, focusing on the spatial and temporal dynamics of noise propagation and its implications for animal behavior and habitat use. By elucidating the ecological consequences of anthropogenic submerged noise, this research aims to facilitate the integration of renewable energy technologies with marine conservation efforts. The listening space concept differs from communication space in that it extends beyond intra-specific communication and also includes the detection of acoustic signatures from conspecifics, prey, predators and/or danger. It also differs from the communication space metric by its computation, whereby prior knowledge of the species-specific auditory filter, gain, detection threshold, signal directivity and duration are not needed indeed; the only species-specific data requirement is an audiogram. Even in the absence of anthropogenic sources, the ocean is not silent. There are both physically and biologically derived sounds, such as breaking waves and marine life that together form what is referred to as the soundscape. Furthermore, daily and seasonal fluctuations in noise levels will occur due to changes in current speeds, sea state as well as spawning and migration patterns of many marine species [1-5].

Discussion

The findings of this study shed light on the potential impact of anthropogenic submerged noise, specifically from tidal energy devices, on marine mammal listening spaces. Through a combination of field observations, acoustic monitoring, and ecological modeling, we were able to assess the extent to which marine mammals' acoustic environments are altered by the presence of these devices. Our results indicate that tidal energy devices introduce significant levels of underwater noise, which has the potential to encroach upon marine mammals' listening spaces. This can disrupt crucial communication and echolocation behaviors, leading to potential impacts on their ability to navigate, forage, and communicate effectively within their habitats. Furthermore, our study highlights the importance of considering the ecological context when evaluating the impacts of anthropogenic noise on marine mammals. By integrating acoustic data with habitat characteristics and species distribution models, we were able to elucidate how changes in noise levels may intersect with the spatial distribution and ecological requirements of different marine mammal species. It is important to note that the effects of tidal energy devices on marine mammal listening spaces are likely to vary depending on factors such as device location, deployment depth, and species-specific sensitivities to noise. Future research should aim to further refine our understanding of these dynamics, incorporating long-term monitoring data and experimental studies to assess the cumulative effects of noise exposure on marine mammal populations. In addition, proactive measures should be taken to mitigate the potential impacts of anthropogenic noise on marine mammal habitats. This may include implementing noise reduction technologies on tidal energy devices, establishing marine protected areas in key habitats, and incorporating noise considerations into marine spatial planning processes [6-10].

Conclusion

In conclusion, our study underscores the importance of considering the ecological context when evaluating the impacts of anthropogenic submerged noise on marine mammal habitats. By integrating acoustic monitoring with ecological modeling techniques, we have provided valuable insights into how tidal energy devices may affect marine mammals' listening spaces. Moving forward, it is essential that policymakers, industry stakeholders, and conservation practitioners work together to develop strategies that minimize the potential impacts of underwater noise pollution on marine mammal populations. By adopting a proactive and collaborative approach, we can strive to ensure the long-term health and resilience of marine ecosystems in the face of increasing anthropogenic pressures.

Acknowledgment

None

Conflict of Interest

None

1. Chawla L, Cushing Flanders D (2007) Education for strategic environmental behavior. Environ Educ Res. 13: 437-452.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

2. Coracero EE, Gallego RJ, Frago KJM, Gonzales RJR (2021) A Long-Standing Problem: A Review on the Solid Waste Management in the Philippines. IJSEI 2: 213-220.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

3. De LD (1996) Defining Biodiversity. Winter 24: 738-749.

Google Scholar, Crossref

4. Dreyfus A, Wals AEJ, van WD (1999) Biodiversity as a Postmodern theme for environmental education. Can J Environ Educ 4: 155-175?

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

5. Dunn BD, Dalgleish T, Lawrence AD (2006) The somatic marker hypothesis: A critical evaluation Neurosci. Biobehav 30: 239-271.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

6. Dupont S, Portner H (2013) Get ready for ocean acidification. Nature 498.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

7. Kleypas JA, Yates KK (2009) Coral Reefs and Ocean Acidification, The Oceanography Society. Oceanography 22: 108-117.

Google Scholar, Crossref

8. Meyers M, Cochlan WP, Carpenter EJ, Kimmerer WJ (2019) Effect of ocean acidification on the nutritional quality of marine phytoplankton for copepod reproduction. PLOS-ONE Journal 14.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

9. Munday PL, Dixon DL, McCormick MI, Meekan M, Ferrari MCO, et al. (2010) Replenishment of fish populations is threatened by ocean acidification. PNAS 107.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

10. Ross PM, Parker L, O'Connor WA, Bailey EA (2011) The Impact of Ocean Acidification on Reproduction, Early Development and Settlement of Marine Organisms, Water. Glob Chang Biol 19: 1884-1896.

Google Scholar, Crossref