Aquatic animals live in an acoustic world in which they often rely on sound detection and recognition for various aspects of life that may affect survival and reproduction. Human exploitation of marine resources leads to increasing amounts of anthropogenic sound underwater, which may affect marine life negatively. Marine mammals and fishes are known to use sounds and to be affected by anthropogenic noise, but relatively little is known about invertebrates such as decapod crustaceans. We conducted experimental trials in the natural conditions of a quiet cove. We attracted shore crabs (Carcinus maenas) and common shrimps (Crangon crangon) with an experimentally fixed food item and compared trials in which we started playback of a broadband artificial sound to trials without exposure. During trials with sound exposure, the cumulative count of crabs that aggregated at the food item was lower, while variation in cumulative shrimp count could be explained by a negative correlation with crabs. These results suggest that crabs may be negatively affected by artificially elevated noise levels, but that shrimps may indirectly benefit by competitive release. Eating activity for the animals present was not affected by the sound treatment in either species. Our results show that moderate changes in acoustic conditions due to human activities can affect foraging interactions at the base of the marine food chain.

Anthropogenic noise underwater is increasingly recognized as a pollutant for marine ecology, as marine life often relies on sound for orientation and communication. However, noise may not only interfere with processes mediated through sound, but also have effects across sensory modalities. To understand the mechanisms of the impact of anthropogenic sound to its full extent, we also need to study cross-sensory interference. To study this, we examined the effect of boat sound playbacks on olfactory-mediated food finding behaviour of shore crabs. We utilized opaque T-mazes with a consistent water flow from both ends towards the starting zone, while one end contained a dead food item. In this way, there were no visual or auditory cues and crabs could only find the food based on olfaction. We did not find an overall effect of boat sound on food finding success, foraging duration or walking distance. However, after excluding deviant data from one out of the six different boat stimuli, we found that crabs were faster to reach the food during boat sound playbacks. These results, with and without the deviant data, seem to contradict an earlier field study in which fewer crabs aggregated around a food source during elevated noise levels. We hypothesise that this difference could be explained by a difference in hunger level, with the current T-maze crabs being hungrier than the free-ranging crabs. Hunger level may affect the motivation to find food and the decision to avoid or take risks, but further research is needed to test this. In conclusion, we did not find unequivocal evidence for a negative impact of boat sound on the processing or use of olfactory cues. Nevertheless, the distinct pattern warrants follow up and calls for even larger replicate samples of acoustic stimuli for noise exposure experiments.