Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Acoustic deterrents to manage fish populations

  • Reviews
  • Published:
Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Finding effective ways to direct native fish away from anthropogenic hazards and limit the spread of invasive species, without physical intervention, harming non-target fishes or interrupting aquatic commerce is a major challenge for fisheries management. One option is to target fish sensory systems to manipulate behavior using attractive or repulsive cues. Many, if not all species of fish, use sound as part of their behavioral repertoire and display varying degrees of phonotaxis. Sound has inherent advantages over other sensory stimuli such as light or odor as underwater sound attenuates slowly, is highly directional and is unimpeded by low light or water turbidity. This review details the use of acoustics to deter and guide fish movements for a wide variety of fishes, before critically assessing the benefits and limitations of the technology. No single method of fish deterrence is a “one size fits all”, and therefore this review will assist both managers and researchers attempting to use acoustic deterrents for different fish orders.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acou A, Laffaille P, Legault A, Feunteun E (2008) Migration pattern of silver eel (Anguilla anguilla, L.) in an obstructed river system. Ecol Freshw Fish 17:432–442

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen GS, Amaral SV, Black J (2012) Fish protection technologies: the US experience. In: Rajagopal S, Jenner HA, Venugopalan VP (eds) Operational and environmental consequences of large industrial cooling water systems. Springer, Boston, pp 371–390

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson JJ, Puckett KJ, Nemeth RS (1998) Studies on the effect of behavior on fish guidance efficacy at the Rocky Reach Dam: avoidance to strobe light and other stimuli. Fisheries Research, Institute of the University of Washington, Seattle

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnett EB, Hein CD, Schirmacher MR, Huso MMP, Szewczak JM (2013) Evaluating the effectiveness of an ultrasonic acoustic deterrent for reducing bat fatalities at wind turbines. PLoS ONE 8:e65794

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bakke BM (1993) Managing for productivity: a new strategy for pacific salmon recovery. Trout J Coldwater Fish Conserv Summer:37–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Banner A (1972) Use of sound in predation by young lemon sharks, Negaprion brevirostris (Poey). Bull Mar Sci 22:251–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaxter JHS, Hoss DE (1981) Startle response in herring: the effect of sound stimulus frequency, size of fish and selective interference with the acoustico-lateralis system. J Mar Biol Assoc U K 61:871–879

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite V (2010) Do fish feel pain?. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun CB, Grande T (2008) Evolution of peripheral mechanisms for the enhancement of sound reception. In: Webb JF, Fay RR, Popper AN (eds) Fish bioacoustics: with 81 illustrations. Springer, New York, pp 99–144

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown RS, Colotelo AH, Pflugrath BD, Boys CA, Baumgartner LJ, Deng ZD, Silva LGM, Brauner CJ, Mallen-Cooper M, Phonekhampeng O, Thorncraft G, Singhanouvong D (2014) Understanding barotrauma in fish passing hydro structures: a global strategy for sustainable development of water resources. Fisheries 39:108–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruijs M, Durif C, Noakes DLG (2009) Silver eel migration and behavior. In: Thillart G, Dufour S, Rankin JC (eds) Spawning migration of the European eel. Springer, Berlin, pp 65–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Buerkle U (1968) An audiogram of the Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua. J Fish Res Board Can 25:1155–1160

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullen CR, Carlson TJ (2003) Non-physical fish barrier systems: their development and potential applications to marine ranching. Rev Fish Biol Fish 13:201–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Casper BM, Mann DA (2006) Evoked potential audiograms of the nurse shark (Ginglymostoma cirratum) and the yellow stingray (Urobatis jamaicensis). Environ Biol Fishes 76:101–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman CJ, Hawkins AD (1973) A field study of hearing in the cod, Gadus morhua L. J Comp Physiol 85:147–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman CJ, Sand O (1974) Field studies of hearing in two species of flatfish Pleuronectes platessa (L.) and Limanda limanda (L.) (family pleuronectidae). Comp Biochem Physiol A Physiol 47:371–385

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Codarin A, Wysocki LE, Ladich F, Picciulin M (2009) Effects of ambient and boat noise on hearing and communication in three fish species living in a marine protected area (Miramare, Italy). Mar Pollut Bull 58:1880–1887

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Colgan P (1993) The motivational basis of fish behaviour. In: Pitcher TJ (ed) Behaviour of teleost fishes. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 31–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Crook V (2010) Trade in Anguilla species, with a focus on recent trade in European Eeel A. anguilla. In: TRAFFIC report prepared for the European Commission. International Union for the Conservation of Nature

  • Cooke SJ, Hinch SG, Wikelski M, Andrews RD, Kuchel LJ, Wolcott TG, Butler PJ (2004) Biotelemetry: a mechanistic approach to ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 19:334–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Corwin J (1978) The relation of inner ear structure to the feeding behavior in sharks and rays. Scan Electron Microsc 2:1105–1112

    Google Scholar 

  • Deleau MJC, White PR, Peirson G, Leighton TG, Kemp PS (2019) Use of acoustics to enhance the efficiency of physical screens designed to protect downstream moving European eel (Anguilla anguilla). Fish Manag Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/fme.12362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng XY, Wagner HJ, Popper AN (2011) The inner ear and its coupling to the swim bladder in the deep sea fish Antimora rostrata (Teleostei: Moridae). Deep Sea Res I 58:27–37

    Google Scholar 

  • DuBois RB, Gloss SP (1993) Mortality of juvenile american shad and striped bass passed through Ossberger crossflow turbines at a small-scale hydroelectric site. North Am J Fish Manag 13:178–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan A, Lucke K, Erbe C, McCauley RD (2016) Issues associated with sound exposure experiments in tanks. Proc Meet Acoust 27:070008

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunning DJ, Ross QE, Geoghegan P, Reichle JJ, Menezes JK, Watson JK (1992) Alewives avoid high-frequency sound. North Am J Fish Manag 12:407–416

    Google Scholar 

  • Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (1998) Review of downstream fish passage and protection technology evaluations and effectiveness. EPRI, Palo Alto

    Google Scholar 

  • ESEERCO (1991) Responses of white perch, striped bass, alewives, spottail shiners, golden shiners and Altantic tomcod in a cage to high and low frequency underwater sounds generated by an electronic fish startle system. In: Project EP89-30. ESEERCO, Amherst, New York

  • EU Water Framework Directive (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament. Off J Eur Commun Legis L 327(1):1–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans DH, Claiborne JB (2006) The physiology of fishes. Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Fay RR, Popper AN (1975) Modes of stimulation of the teleost ear. J Exp Biol 62(2):379

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fay RR, Popper AN (1978) Structure and function in teleost auditory systems. J Acoust Soc Am 64:S1–S1

    Google Scholar 

  • Fish Guidance Systems Ltd (2010) BAFF: synchronised intense light and sound—driven BAFF system, Central Valley California. Fish Guidance Systems Ltd., Business Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Fish Guidance Systems Ltd and Hydro Energy Developments Ltd (1996) Testing of an acoustic smolt deflection system. Blantyre Hydroelectric Power Scheme

  • Gardiner JM, Hueter RE, Maruska KP, Sisneros JA, Casper BM, Mann DA, Demski LS (2012) Sensory physiology and behavior of elasmobranchs. Biology of sharks and their relatives. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson AF, Myers RA (2002) Effectiveness of a high-frequency-sound fish diversion system at the Annapolis tidal hydroelectric generating station, Nova Scotia. North Am J Fish Manag 22:770–784

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray MD, Rogers PH, Zeddies DG (2016) Acoustic particle motion measurement for bioacousticians: principles and pitfalls. Proc Meet Acoust 27:010022

    Google Scholar 

  • Halvorsen MB, Casper BM, Woodley CM, Carlson TJ, Popper AN (2012) Threshold for onset of injury in chinook salmon from exposure to impulsive pile driving sounds. PLoS ONE 7:e38968

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hamel MJ, Brown ML, Chipps SR (2011) Behavioral responses of rainbow smelt to in situ strobe lights. North Am J Fish Manag 28:394–401

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding H, Bruintjes R, Radford AN, Simpson SD (2016) Measurement of hearing in the Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) using auditory evoked potentials, and effects of pile driving playback on salmon behaviour and physiology. Mar Scotl Sci 7:1–51

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hastings MC, Popper AN, Finneran JJ, Lanford PJ (1996) Effects of low-frequency underwater sound on hair cells of the inner ear and lateral line of the teleost fish Astronotus ocellatus. J Acoust Soc Am 99:1759–1766

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins AD (1981) The hearing abilities of fish. In: Tavolga WN, Popper AN, Fay RR (eds) Hearing and sound communication in fishes. Springer, New York, pp 109–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins AD (1986) Underwater sound and fish behaviour. In: Pitcher TJ (ed) The behaviour of teleost fishes. Springer, Boston, pp 114–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins AD, Johnstone ADF (1978) The hearing of the Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar. J Fish Biol 13:655–674

    Google Scholar 

  • Haymes GT, Patrick PH (1986) Exclusion of adult alewife, Alosa pseudoharengus using low-frequency sound for application at water intakes. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 43:855–862

    Google Scholar 

  • Hecker GE, Allen GS (2005) An approach to predicting fish survival for advanced technology turbines. HCI Publications Inc., St Louis

    Google Scholar 

  • Helvey M, Dorn PB (1987) Selective removal of reef fish associated with an offshore cooling-water intake structure. J Appl Ecol 24:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgs DM, Radford CA (2016) The potential overlapping roles of the ear and lateral line in driving “acoustic” responses. In: Sisneros JA (ed) Fish hearing and bioacoustics: an anthology in honor of Arthur N. Popper and Richard R. Fay. Springer, Cham, pp 255–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Holand B, Walso O (1988) Sound barrier: experiments with cod at Sommaroyhamn. SINTEF Rapport for Myre Havbruk. In: Fish protection at cooling water intake structures: a technologies reference. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA

  • Hueter RE, Mann DA, Maruska KP, Sisneros JA, Demski LS (2004) Sensory biology of elasmobranchs. CRC Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Jerkø H, Turunen-Rise I, Enger PS, Sand O (1989) Hearing in the eel (Anguilla anguilla). J Comp Physiol A 165:455–459

    Google Scholar 

  • Jesus J et al (2018) Acoustic barriers as an acoustic deterrent for native potamodromous migratory fish species. J Fish Biol 95(1):247–255

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson PN, Bouchard K, Goetz FA (2005) Effectiveness of strobe lights for reducing juvenile salmonid entrainment into a navigation lock. North Am J Fish Manag 25:491–501

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlsen HE (1992) The inner ear is responsible for detection of infrasound in the perch (Perca fluviatilis). J Exp Biol 171:163–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller RP, Geist J, Jeschke JM, Kühn I (2011) Invasive species in Europe: ecology, status, and policy. Environ Sci Europe 23:23

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly JC, Nelson DR (1975) Hearing thresholds of the horn shark Heterodontus francisci. J Acoust Soc Am 58:905–909

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kenyon TN, Ladich F, Yan HY (1998) A comparative study of hearing ability in fishes: the auditory brainstem response approach. J Comp Physiol A 182:307–318

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Klimley AP, Myrberg AA (1979) Acoustic stimuli underlying withdrawal from a sound source by adult lemon sharks, Negaprion brevirostris (Poey). Bull Mar Sci 29:447–458

    Google Scholar 

  • Knudsen FR (1997) Infrasound: Atlantic salmon in Norway and Pacific salmonids in the Umatilla River. In: Using sound to modify fish behavior at a power-production and water-control facilities: a workshop December 12–13, 1995. Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, p 360

  • Knudsen FR, Enger PS, Sand O (1992) Awareness reactions and avoidance responses to sound in juvenile Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L. J Fish Biol 40:523–534

    Google Scholar 

  • Knudsen FR, Enger PS, Sand O (1994) Avoidance responses to low frequency sound in downstream migrating Atlantic salmon smolt, Salmo salar. J Fish Biol 45:227–233

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladich F, Fay RR (2013) Auditory evoked potential audiometry in fish. Rev Fish Biol Fish 23:317–364

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Leighton TG, Walton AJ (1987) An experimental study of the sound emitted from gas bubbles in a liquid. Eur J Phys 8:98

    Google Scholar 

  • Lough RG et al (1985) Larval abundance and mortality of Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus L.) spawned in the Georges Bank and Nantucket Shoals Areas, 1971–78 seasons, in relation to spawning stock size. J Northwest Atl Fish Organ 6(1):21–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovell JM, Findlay MM, Nedwell JR, Pegg MA (2006) The hearing abilities of the silver carp (Hypopthalmichthys molitrix) and bighead carp (Aristichthys nobilis). Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol 143:286–291

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lowe S, Browne M, Boudjelas S, De Poorter M (2000) 100 of the world’s worst invasive alien species: a selection from the global invasive species database. IUCN, Auckland

    Google Scholar 

  • Maes J, Turnpenny AWH, Lambert DR, Nedwell JR, Parmentier A, Ollevier F (2004) Field evaluation of a sound system to reduce estuarine fish intake rates at a power plant cooling water inlet. J Fish Biol 64:938–946

    Google Scholar 

  • Maniwa Y (1976) Attraction of bony fish, squid and crab by sound. In: Schuijf A, Hawkins A (eds) Sound reception in fish. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 271–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann DA, Lobel PS (1995) Passive acoustic detection of sounds produced by the damselfish Dascyllus albisella (Pomacentridae). Bioacoustics 6:199–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann DA, Lu Z, Popper AN (1997) A clupeid fish can detect ultrasound. Nature 389:341

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mann DA, Higgs DM, Tavolga WN, Souza MJ, Popper AN (2001) Ultrasound detection by clupeiform fishes. J Acoust Soc Am 109:3048–3054

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mann DA, Popper AN, Wilson B (2005) Pacific herring hearing does not include ultrasound. Biol Lett 1:158–161

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Marchesan M, Spoto M, Verginella L, Ferrero EA (2005) Behavioural effects of artificial light on fish species of commercial interest. Fish Res 73:171–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Maruska KP, Sisneros JA (2016) Comparison of electrophysiological auditory measures in fishes. In: Sisneros JA (ed) Fish hearing and bioacoustics: an anthology in honor of Arthur N. Popper and Richard R. Fay. Springer, Cham, pp 227–254

    Google Scholar 

  • McKinley RS, Patrick PH, Mussalli YG (1987) Influence of three sonic devices on fish behavior. EPRI, Palo Alto

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeely JA, Mooney HA, Neville LE, Schei P, Waage JK (2001) A global strategy on invasive alien species. IUCN, Gland

    Google Scholar 

  • Mensinger AF (2014) Disruptive communication: stealth signaling in the toadfish. J Exp Biol 217:344

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Millot S, Vandewalle P, Parmentier E (2011) Sound production in red-bellied piranhas (Pygocentrus nattereri): an acoustical, behavioural and morphofunctional study. J Exp Biol 214:3613

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller RP, Neitzel DA, Mavros WV, Carlson TJ (1998) Evaluation of low and high frequency sound for enhancing fish screening facilities to protect outmigrating salmonids. U.S Department of Energy, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Murchy KA (2016) Bioacoustic deterrence of invasive bigheaded carp. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis

    Google Scholar 

  • Murchy KA, Vetter BJ, Brey MK, Amberg JJ, Gaikowski MP, Mensinger AF (2016) Not all carp are created equal: impacts of broadband sound on common carp swimming behavior. Proc Meet Acoust 27:010032

    Google Scholar 

  • Mussen TD (2000) How fish detect screen: investigating fishes' abilities to avoid screens while swimming in a current, and testing vibrations and strobe lights as deterrents. In: Cech JJ Jr, Moyle PB, Klimley AP (ed) Department of Ecology, University of California, Davis

  • Mussen TD, Cech JJ Jr (2019) Assessing the use of vibrations and strobe lights at fish screens as enhanced deterrents for two estuarine fishes. J Fish Biol 95:238–246

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Myrberg AA (2001) The acoustical biology of elasmobranchs. Environ Biol Fishes 60:31–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson DR, Gruber SH (1963) Sharks: attraction by low-frequency sounds. Science 142:975–977

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Neo YY, Hubert J, Bolle L, Winter HV, ten Cate C, Slabbekoorn H (2016) Sound exposure changes European seabass behaviour in a large outdoor floating pen: effects of temporal structure and a ramp-up procedure. Environ Pollut 214:26–34

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman SM et al (2013) Wave and tidal consenting position paper series: impacts on fish and shellfish ecology. Krohn D (ed) National Environment Research Council

  • Nestler JM, Ploskey GR, Pickens J, Menezes J, Schilt C (1992) Responses of blueback herring to high-frequency sound and implications for reducing entrainment at hydropower dams. North Am J Fish Manag 12:667–683

    Google Scholar 

  • New York Power Authority (NYPA) Inc (1991) Response of white perch, striped bass, alewives, spottail shiners, golden shiners, and Atlantic tomcod in a cage to high and low frequency underwater sounds generated by an electronic fish startle system. EPRI, Palo Alto

    Google Scholar 

  • Noatch MR, Suski CD (2012) Non-physical barriers to deter fish movements. Environ Rev 20:71–82

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell M, Letcher BH (2017) Implanting 8-mm passive integrated transponder tags into small brook trout: effects on growth and survival in the laboratory. North Am J Fish Manag 37:605–611

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Keefe N, Clough SC, Lepper PA (2009) Preliminary investigations into the response of 0 + twaite shad (Alosa fallax) to ultrasound and its potential as an entrainment deterrent. In: Fifth internation conference on bio-acoustics. Loughborough: Proceedings of the institute of acoustics, pp 57–63

  • Olsen E (1976) Directional response of herring to sound and noise stimuli. Int Counc Explor Sea P20:8

    Google Scholar 

  • Parmentier E, Fine ML (2016) Fish sound production: insights. In: Suthers RA, Fitch WT, Fay RR, Popper AN (eds) Vertebrate sound production and acoustic communication. Springer, Cham, pp 19–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Patrick PH, Christie AE, Sager DR, Hocutt CH, Stauffer JR (1985) Responses of fish to a strobe light/air-bubble barrier. Fish Res 3:157–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Patrick PH, McKinley RS, Christie AE, Holsapple JG (1988) Fish protection: sonic deterrents. In: Fish protection at steam and hydroelectic power plants. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), San Francisco, CA

  • Patrick PH, Poulton JS, Brown R (2001) Responses of American eels to strobe light and sound (preliminary data) and introduction to sound conditioning as a potential fish passage technology. In: Coutant C (ed) Behavioral technologies for fish guidance. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry RW, Romine JG, Adams NS, Blake AR, Burau JR, Johnston SV, Liedtke TL (2012) Using a non-physical behavioral barrier to alter migration routing of juvenile chinook salmon in the Sacramento San Joaquin River Delta. River Res Appl 30(2):192–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Piper AT, White PR, Wright RM, Leighton TG, Kemp PS (2019) Response of seaward-migrating European eel (Anguilla anguilla) to an infrasound deterrent. Ecol Eng 127:480–486

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper AN, Fay RR (1993) Sound detection and processing by fish: critical review and major research questions (part 1 of 2). Brain Behav Evol 41:14–25

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Popper AN, Fay RR (1997) Evolution of the ear and hearing: issues and questions. Brain Behav Evol 50:213–221

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Popper AN, Fay RR (2011) Rethinking sound detection by fishes. Hear Res 273:25–36

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Popper AN, Hastings MC (2009) The effects of anthropogenic sources of sound on fishes. J Fish Biol 75:455–489

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Popper AN, Hawkins AD (2018) The importance of particle motion to fishes and invertebrates. J Acoust Soc Am 143:470–488

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Popper AN, Schilt CR (2008) Hearing and acoustic behavior: basic and applied considerations. In: Webb JF, Fay RR, Popper AN (eds) Fish bioacoustics: with 81 illustrations. Springer, New York, pp 17–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Purser J, Radford AN (2011) Acoustic noise induces attention shifts and reduces foraging performance in three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus). PLoS ONE 6:e17478

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Radford AN, Kerridge E, Simpson SD (2014) Acoustic communication in a noisy world: can fish compete with anthropogenic noise? Behav Ecol 25:1022–1030

    Google Scholar 

  • Radford CA, Putland RL, Mensinger AF (2018) Barking mad: the vocalisation of the John Dory, Zeus faber. PLoS ONE 13:e0204647

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rankin CH, Abrams T, Barry RJ, Bhatnagar S, Clayton DF, Colombo J, Coppola G, Geyer MA, Glanzman DL, Marsland S, McSweeney FK, Wilson DA, Wu C, Thompson RF (2009) Habituation revisited: an updated and revised description of the behavioral characteristics of habituation. Neurobiol Learn Mem 92:135–138

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ricciardi A, MacIsaac HJ (2011) Impacts of biological invasions on freshwater ecosystems. In: Richardson DM (ed) Fifty years of invasion ecology: the legacy of Charles Elton. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 211–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross QE, Dunning DJ, Menezes JK, Kenna MJ, Tiller G (1995) Reducing impingement of alewives with high freuqency sound at a power plant intake on Lake Ontario. North Am J Fish Manag 15:378–388

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossi L, Rossi JL (2004) Frequency modulation of the sounds produced by the AQUAmark 200® deterrent devices. Acoust Res Lett Online 6:20–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruebush BC et al (2012) In-situ tests of sound-bubble-strobe light barrier technologies to prevent range expansions of Asian carp. Aquat Invasions 7(1):37–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan LA, Chapuis L, Hemmi JM, Collin SP, McCauley RD, Yopak KE, Gennari E, Huveneers C, Kempster RM, Kerr CC, Schmidt C, Egeberg CA, Hart NS (2017) Effects of auditory and visual stimuli on shark feeding behaviour: the disco effect. Mar Biol 165:11

    Google Scholar 

  • Sager DR, Hocutt CH, Stauffer JR (1987) Estuarine fish responses to strobe light, bubble curtains and strobe light/bubble-curtain combinations as influenced by water flow rate and flash frequencies. Fish Res 5:383–399

    Google Scholar 

  • Sand O, Karlsen HE (1986) Detection of infrasound by the Atlantic cod. J Exp Biol 125:197–204

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sand O, Enger PS, Karlsen HE, Knudsen F, Kvernstuen T (2000) Avoidance responses to infrasound in downstream migrating European silver eels, Anguilla anguilla. Environ Biol Fishes 57(3):327–336

    Google Scholar 

  • Sand O, Enger PS, Karlsen HE, Knudsen FR (2001) Detection of infrasound in fish and behavioral responses to intense infrasound in juvenile salmonids and European silver eels: a minireview. Am Fish Soc Symp 26:183–193

    Google Scholar 

  • Sara G, Dean JM, Amato DD, Buscaino G, Oliveri A, Genovese S, Ferro S, Buffa G, Lo Martire M, Mazzola S (2007) Effect of boat noise on the behaviour of bluefin tuna Thunnus thynnus in the Mediterranean Sea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 331:243–253

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholik AR, Yan HY (2002) Effects of boat engine noise on the auditory sensitivity of the fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas. Environ Biol Fishes 63:203–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz AL, Greer GL (1984) Responses of Pacific herring, Clupea harengus pallasi, to some underwater sounds. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 41(8):1183–1192

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheridan S, Turnpenny AWH, Horsfield D, Solomon DJ, Bamford B, Bayliss S, Coates I, Dolben P, Frear E, Hazard I, Tavner N, Trudgill R, Wright RM, Aprahamian M (2014) Screening at intakes and outfalls: measures to protect eel. Environment Agency, Bristol

    Google Scholar 

  • Sisneros JA, Popper AN, Hawkins AD, Fay RR (2016) Auditory evoked potential audiograms compared with behavioral audiograms in aquatic animals. Springer, New York, pp 1049–1056

    Google Scholar 

  • Sloan JL, Cordo EB, Mensinger AF (2013) Acoustical conditioning and retention in the common carp (Cyprinus carpio). J Great Lakes Res 39:507–512

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith ME, Kane AS, Popper AN (2004a) Acoustical stress and hearing sensitivity in fishes: does the linear threshold shift hypothesis hold water? J Exp Biol 207:3591–3602

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith ME, Kane AS, Popper AN (2004b) Noise-induced stress response and hearing loss in goldfish (Carassius auratus). J Exp Biol 207:427–435

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sonny D, Knudsen FR, Enger PS, Kvernstuen T, Sand O (2006) Reactions of cyprinids to infrasound in a lake and at the cooling water inlet of a nuclear power plant. J Fish Biol 69:735–748

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprott TA (2001) Preliminary report on the field testing of an air curtain screen to minimize fish passage onto submerged floating drydocks. NSRP Environmental Studies and Testing Panel, SP-1, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Taft EP, Dixon DA, Sullivan CW (2001) Electric Power Research Institute’s (EPRI) research on behavioral technologies. In: Coutant C (ed) Behavioral technologies for fish guidance. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavolga WN (1967) Masked auditory thresholds in teleost fishes. In: Tavolga WN (ed) Marine bio-acoustics. Pergamon Pres, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavolga WN (1971) Chapter 6. Sound production and detection. In: Hoar WS, Randall DJ (eds) Fish physiology. Academic Press, Cambridge, pp 135–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor RM, Pegg MA, Chick JH (2005) Response of bighead carp to a bioacoustic behavioural fish guidance system. Fish Manag Ecol 12:283–286

    Google Scholar 

  • Tindle CT (1982) Attenuation parameters from normal mode measurements. J Acoust Soc Am 71:1145–1148

    Google Scholar 

  • Tindle CT, Deane GB (2005) Shallow water propagation with surface waves. J Acoust Soc Am 117:2783–2794

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Turnpenny AWH, Nedwell JR (2003) Screening and other fish diversion/deterrent technologies. In: Agency, USEP (ed) Symposium on cooling water intake technologies to protect aquatic organisms May 6–7. Arlington, Virginia

  • Turnpenny AWH, O’Keefe N (2005) Screening for intake and outfalls: a best practice guide. Environment Agency, Bristol

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnpenny AWH, Thatcher KP, Wood R, Nedwell JR (1994) Fish deterrent field trials at Hinkley Power Station, Somerset, 1993–1994. Fawley Aquatic Labs. Ltd, Fawley

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnpenny AWH, Fleming JM, Thatcher KP, Wood R (1995) Trials of an acoustic fish deterrent system at Hartlepool Power Station. Fawley Aquatic Labs. Ltd, Fawley

    Google Scholar 

  • University of Florida (2018) Plant management in Florida waters: an integrated approach. University of Florida, Gainesville

    Google Scholar 

  • Urick RJ (1983) Principles of underwater sound. McGraw-Hill Inc, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • US Clean Water Act (1972) Federal Water Pollution Control Act, Government, E. P. A. a. U., (ed)

  • US Environmental Protection Agency (2003) A symposium on cooling water intake technologies to protect aquatic organisms. Arlington, Virginia

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Walker JG (1966) Response of salmonids to low frequency sound. In: Tavolga WN (ed) Proceeding of the second symposium on marine bio-acoustics, New York. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 45–58

    Google Scholar 

  • van Oosterom L, Montgomery JC, Jeffs AG, Radford CA (2016) Evidence for contact calls in fish: conspecific vocalisations and ambient soundscape influence group cohesion in a nocturnal species. Sci Rep 6:19098

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • VanDerWalker JG (1967) Response of salmonids to low frequency sound. In: Tavolga WN (ed) Marine bioacoustics II. Pergamon Press, New York, pp 45–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Vetter BJ, Mensinger AF (2016) Broadband sound can induce jumping behavior in invasive silver carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix). Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics 27:010021

    Google Scholar 

  • Vetter BJ, Cupp AR, Fredricks KT, Gaikowski MP, Mensinger AF (2015) Acoustical deterrence of silver carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix). Biol Invasions 17:3383–3392

    Google Scholar 

  • Vetter BJ, Murchy KA, Cupp AR, Amberg JJ, Gaikowski MP, Mensinger AF (2017) Acoustic deterrence of bighead carp (Hypophthalmichthys nobilis) to a broadband sound stimulus. J Great Lakes Res 43:163–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Vetter BJ, Brey MK, Mensinger AF (2018) Reexamining the frequency range of hearing in silver (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix) and bighead (H. nobilis) carp. PLoS ONE 13:e0192561

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wahlberg M (1999) A review of the literature on acoustic herding and attraction in fish. Fishkeriverket Rapport 1999:2

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber EH (1820) De aure et auditu hominis et animalium: De aure animalium aquatilium: cum x tabulis aeneis, vol 1. Bavarian State Library, Fleischer

    Google Scholar 

  • Welton JS, Beaumont WRC, Clarke RT (2002) The efficacy of air, sound and acoustic bubble screens in deflecting Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., smolts in the River Frome, UK. Fish Manag Ecol 9:11–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Westenberg J (1953) Acoustical aspectsof some Indonesian fisheries. J du Conseil pour l’Exploration de la Mer 19:311–325

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolff D (1967) Akustische Untersuchungen zur Klapperfischerei und verwandter Metoden. Zeitschrift fur Fischerei XIV:277–315

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood R, Thatcher KP, Woodcock A, Turnpenny AWH (1994) Fish deterrent trials at the River Foss pumping station, York, 1993–1994. Fawley Aquatic Research Laboratories Ltd., Southampton

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu YH, Yu HY, Shao IT, Lee ZC, Lin ST, Yan HY, Hsu CH, Lee CP, Jiang HH (2009) The method using underwater sound in reducing fish entrainment and impingement at cooling water inlets of nuclear power plants in northern Taiwan. Tai Power Eng Mon 733:108–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Wysocki LE, Ladich F (2005) Hearing in fishes under noise conditions. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 6:28–36

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang GS, Hiraishi T, Motomatsu K, Yamamoto K, Nashimoto K (1998) Auditory threshold of marbled sole Pleuronectes yokohamae. Nippon Suisan Gakaishi 64:211–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Zielinski DP, Sorensen PW (2015) Field test of a bubble curtain deterrent system for common carp. Fish Manag Ecol 22:181–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Zielinski DP, Sorensen PW (2016) Bubble curtain deflection screen diverts the movement of both Asian and common carp. North Am J Fish Manag 36:267–276

    Google Scholar 

  • Zielinski DP, Sorensen PW (2017) Silver, bighead, and common carp orient to acoustic particle motion when avoiding a complex sound. PLoS ONE 12:e0180110

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Zielinski DP, Voller VR, Svendsen JC, Hondzo M, Mensinger AF, Sorensen P (2014) Laboratory experiments demonstrate that bubble curtains can effectively inhibit movement of common carp. Ecol Eng 67:95–103

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Grant 00065033 to AFM.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, University of Minnesota Duluth, Swenson Science Building, Duluth, MN, 55812, USA

    R. L. Putland & A. F. Mensinger

Authors
  1. R. L. Putland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. F. Mensinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. L. Putland.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 313 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Putland, R.L., Mensinger, A.F. Acoustic deterrents to manage fish populations. Rev Fish Biol Fisheries 29, 789–807 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-019-09583-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-019-09583-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation