Urban noise affects song structure and daily patterns of song production in Red-winged Blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus)

Traffic noise is becoming a more prominent fixture in urban environments as cities and highways expand to accommodate the growing human population. Birds, in particular, rely heavily on vocal communication and have recently been shown to change the structure of their signals in response to environmental noise. Our objective was to determine the impact of traffic noise on Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus) song structure and song timing. We recorded bird songs using a directional microphone and installed permanent recording devices to monitor daily song patterns at both high traffic noise sites and low traffic noise sites throughout southern Ontario, Canada. Our results indicate that at sites with high traffic noise, Red-winged Blackbirds sing songs with fewer introductory syllables, which are an important component of individual recognition and repertoire formation. In addition, the typical diurnal singing pattern of birds associated with noisy urban sites is more homogeneous than that of birds associated with quiet rural marshes. In the early morning and evening, singing effort was higher at rural sites than at urban sites, while in the midday singing effort at urban sites was higher than at rural sites. Birds at our noisy urban sites appear to be avoiding acoustic masking by increasing song production during the quiet part of the day and decreasing song production during the noisy rush hour periods. Based on our results, urban noise is impacting communication structure and the daily pattern of song production in a marsh-nesting species. These results have important implications for avian conservation and land use planning for urban development

Towards effective ecological restoration: Investigating knowledge co‐production on fish–habitat relationships with Aquatic Habitat Toronto

Abstract For decades, the working paradigm for ecological restoration was independent operation of knowledge generators (researchers and scientists) and knowledge users (decision makers and practitioners), resulting in a knowledge–action gap. Knowledge co‐production is a collaborative process where research is conducted in a respectful and engaging manner with continuous knowledge exchange and heralded as a means of bridging the divide. Aquatic Habitat Toronto (AHT) is a unique consensus‐based partnership with diverse member agencies that engage in restoration ecology and practice along the Toronto Waterfront of Lake Ontario, Canada. Here, we examine the process that AHT uses to enable knowledge co‐production and identify associated benefits and challenges. Benefits to AHT's consensus‐based partnership include advanced notice of projects, access to diverse expertise and local knowledge, increased understanding of fish habitat, adoption of novel restoration techniques and more effective restoration and improved knowledge exchange, collectively mitigating the knowledge–action divide. Challenges of knowledge co‐production facilitated by AHT include consistent agency participation and meaningful engagement, closed or exclusive networks, time commitments and limited financial resources, evolving political landscapes, stability of funding cycles and issues stemming from varying goals and relevancy. Key recommendations for ensuring that knowledge co‐production results in actionable science and for maximizing the effectiveness of ecological restoration using AHT's format include securing long‐term and stable funding, developing relationships across agencies and allied partners, engaging early, outlining goals/objectives collaboratively, conducting before and after scientific monitoring, minimizing personal biases, periodically reviewing partnerships to maximize inclusivity, sharing successes (and failures) broadly, and providing open data. AHT embraces an approach that includes integrated planning with multi‐jurisdictional support with diverse partners at a tractable scale and we argue that this should be the standard model of aquatic ecosystem management

Students' participation in collaborative research should be recognised

Letter to the editor