Frog frequency shifts cannot restore signal reach and may cause local extinction

Evidence

In L. ewingii, the active distance at which calls can be received increases from 19 to 24 m, but really few occur there when compared with the distance of 74.5 m predicted in absence of traffic. L. ewingii changes calls in response to traffic noise but this change is insufficient to modify the signal-to-noise ratio. In conclusion, Parris et al. (2009) underline the risk of local extinction also for populations exposed to traffic noise in suitable habitats. — Almo Farina, Soundscape Ecology, 1378

Categorization

• QUESTION: If frequency shifting rarely restores the signal-to-noise ratio, how general is the claim that it is a real adaptation vs a dead end?
• XREF: Directly extends ch25’s insect noise-masking claims: in frogs the Lombard-style fix fails, linking to earlier curated material on masking thresholds. — connects to: Waterfall frogs shifted calls above the frequency their body size predicts — Almo Farina, Soundscape Ecology: Principles,…, 438; Traffic noise shifts frog calls to frequencies females do not prefer — Almo Farina, Soundscape Ecology: Principles,…, 1526; Habitat-specific ambient noise can drive the evolution of animal signals — Almo Farina, Soundscape Ecology: Principles,…, 336 (+2 more)
• recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source

Broader Connections

• Traffic noise shifts frog calls to frequencies females do not prefer #expands (0.85) — Almo Farina, Soundscape Ecology, 1526
• Geophony from wind and anthrophony from traffic both suppress animal acoustic communication #corroborates (0.85) — Almo Farina, Soundscape Ecology, 127
• Habitat-specific ambient noise can drive the evolution of animal signals #expands (0.80) — Almo Farina, Soundscape Ecology, 336
• Species shift calls to ultrasonic frequencies to escape constant noise masking #qualifies (0.75) — Almo Farina, Soundscape Ecology, 1288