Keywords
earthquake
national park
south Baikal region
Section
Abstract
Documenting the behavioral responses of wild animals using camera traps during a strong or moderate earthquake requires an extremely favorable set of circumstances. Such observations have the greatest prospects within specially protected natural areas (reserves, national parks, sanctuaries, etc.). In the Southern Baikal region, such territories include the Pribaikalsky National Park, the Krasny Yar Federal Sanctuary and the Baikal-Lena State Reserve, which are part of the protected areas of the Federal State Budgetary Institution «Zapovednoye Pribaikalie». These territories, firstly, are subject to relatively strong seismic impacts from earthquakes in the Baikal rift zone, and, secondly, automatic photo and video recording of the behavior of wild animals is carried out within their boundaries. The combination of these factors makes it possible to collect statistically significant amounts of data, analyze them and, as a result, a deeper understanding of the impact that earthquakes have on wildlife. The article presents the first results of comparing the behavior of wild animals in the Pribaikalsky National Park with seismic activity.
References
Гоби-Алтайское землетрясение / Ред. Н.А. Флоренсов, В.П. Солоненко. М.: Изд-воАНСССР, 1963. 391 с. [The Gobi-Altai Earthquake / Eds. N.A. Florensov, V.P. Solonenko. Moscow: Academy of Sciences of the USSR Publishing House, 1963. 391 p. (in Russian)].
Дещеревский А.В., Сидорин А.Я. Изменения в поведении рыб и насекомых перед землетрясениями на Гармском полигоне // Доклады Российской Академии наук. 2004. Т. 399. № 2. С. 245–249 [Deshcherevskii A.V., Sidorin A.Ya. Changes in the behavior of fishes and insects before earthquakes at the Garm test site // Doklady Earth Sciences. 2004. V. 399. № 8. P. 1172–1176].
Ласкина Н.Б., Гаев Д.Н., Бурканов В.Н. Землетрясение на Командорских островах: реакция ушастых тюленей // Морские млекопитающие Голарктики: Сборник научных трудов по материалам X международной конференции, посвященной памяти А.В. Яблокова (г. Архангельск, 29 октября – 2 ноября 2018 года). Архангельск: РОО «Совет по морским млекопитающим», 2019. Т. 1. С. 186–192. https://doi.org/10.35267/978-5-9904294-0-6-2019-1-186-192 [Laskina N.B., Gaev D.N., Burkanov V.N. Earthquake on the СommanderIslands: the reaction of eared seals // Marine Mammals of the Holarctic. V. 1. Arkhangelsk: RPO «Marine Mammal Council», 2019. P. 186–192].
Медведев С.В., Шпонхойер В., Карник В. Международная шкала сейсмической интенсивности MSK-64. М.: МГКАНСССР, 1965. 11 с. [Medvedev S.V., Sponheuer W., Kárník V. International Seismic Intensity Scale MSK-64. Moscow: MGK AN SSSR, 1965. 11 p. (in Russian)].
Мельникова В.И., Гилева Н.А., Радзиминович Н.А. и др. Сейсмичность Байкальской рифтовой зоны за период цифровойрегистрации землетрясений (2001–2006 гг.) // Вопросы инженерной сейсмологии. 2009. Т. 36. № 1. С. 40–55 [Mel’nikova V.I., Gileva N.A., Radziminovich N.A. et al. Seismicity of the Baikal rift zone for the digital recording period of earthquake observation (2001–2006) // Seismic Instruments. 2010. V. 47. № 2. P. 193–206. https://doi.org/10.3103/S0747923910020076].
Новый каталог сильных землетрясений на территории СССР с древнейших времен до 1975 г. / Ред. Н.В. Кондорская, Н.В. Шебалин. М.: Наука, 1977. 535 с. [New Catalog of Earthquake in USSR from Ancient Times through 1975 / Eds. N.V. Kondorskaya, N.V. Shebalin. Moscow: Nauka, 1977. 535 p. (in Russian)].
Радзиминович Я.Б., Новопашина А.В., Лухнева О.Ф. Сейсмические воздействия и аномальное поведение животных: Пример Быстринского землетрясения 21.09.2020 г. (Mw=5.5) в Южном Прибайкалье // Геофизические процессы и биосфера. 2021. Т. 20. № 3. С. 61–75. https://doi.org/10.21455/GPB2021.3-4 [Radziminovich Y.B., Novopashina A.V., Lukhneva O.F. Seismic Effects and Anomalous Animal Behavior: Case Study of the September 21, 2020, Mw 5.5 Bystraya Earthquake (Southern Baikal Region) // Izvestiya, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics. 2021. V. 57. № 10. P. 1293–1307. https://doi.org/10.1134/S000143382110008X].
Barlow D.R., Estrada Jorge M., Klinck H., Torres L.G. Shaken, not stirred: blue whales show no acoustic response to earthquake events // Royal Society Open Science. 2022. V. 9. № 7. 220242. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.220242
Berberich G., Berberich M., Grumpe A. et al. Early results of three-year monitoring of red wood ants’ behavioral changes and their possible correlation with earthquake events // Animals. 2013. V. 3. № 1. P. 63–84. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani3010063
Fidani C. Biological anomalies around the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake // Animals. 2013. V. 3. № 3. P. 693–721. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani3030693
Fidani C., Freund F., Grant R. Cows come down from the mountains before the (Mw=6.1) earthquake Colfi orito in September 1997: A single case study // Animals. 2014. V. 4. № 2.Р. 292–312. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani4020292
Fujimoto M., Hanamura S. Responses of wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii) toward seismic aftershocks in the Mahale Mountains National Park, Tanzania // Primates. 2008. V. 49. № 1. P. 73–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10329-007-0052-3
Ge B.M., Guan T.P., Powell D. et al. Effects of an earthquake on wildlife behavior: a case study of takin (Budorcas taxicolor) in Tangjiahe National Nature Reserve, China // Ecological Research. 2011. V. 26. № 1. P. 217–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-010-0759-2
Grant R.A., Savirina A., Hoppitt W. Offshore Earthquakes Do Not Influence Marine Mammal Stranding Risk on the Washington and Oregon Coasts // Animals. 2018. V. 8. № 2. Article 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8020018
Jin Y., Ma X.Z., Luo B. et al. Seismic sentinel? An analysis of captive giant panda behavior in response to the Lushan earthquake in China // Earthquake Science. 2021. V. 34. № 6. P. 522–530. https://doi.org/10.29382/eqs2021-0037
Li Y., Liu Y., Jiang Z. et al. Behavioral change related to Wenchuan devastating earthquake in mice // Bioelectromagnetics. 2009. V. 30. № 8. P. 613–620. https://doi.org/10.1002/bem.20520
Manda K. Laboratory animals as potential biosensors to predict earthquakes // Lab Animal. 2023. V. 52. № 5. P. 97–98. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41684-023-01165-6
Novopashina A.V., Lukhneva O.F. Methodical approach to isolation of seismic activity migration episodes of the northeastern Baikal rift system (Russia) // Episodes. 2020. V. 43. № 4. P. 947–959. https://doi.org/10.18814/epiiugs/2020/020058
Radziminovich Y.B., Gileva N.A., Tubanov T.A. et al. The December 9, 2020, Mw 5.5 Kudara earthquake (Middle Baikal, Russia): Internet questionnaire hard test and macroseismic data analysis // Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering. 2022. V. 20. № 3. P. 1297−1324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01305-8
Rautian T.G., Khalturin V.I., Fujita K. et al. Origins and methodology of the Russian energy K-class system and its relationship to magnitude scales // Seismological Research Letters. 2007. V. 78. № 6. P. 579–590. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.78.6.579
Shebalin N.V. Macroseismic data as information on source parameters of large earthquakes // Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors. 1972. V. 6. № 4. P. 316–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9201(72)90016-7
Snarr K.A. Seismic activity response as observed in mantled howlers (Alouatta palliata), Cuero y Salado Wildlife Refuge, Honduras // Primates. 2005. V. 46. № 4. P. 281–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10329-005-0151-y
Wikelski M., Mueller U., Scocco P. et al. Potential short‐term earthquake forecasting by farm animal monitoring // Ethology. 2020. V. 126. № 9. P. 931–941. https://doi.org/10.1111/eth.13078
Woith H., Petersen G., Hainzl S., Dahm T. Review: Can animals predict earthquakes? // Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. 2018. V. 108. № 3A. P. 1031–1045. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120170313
Xu W., Wang X., Ouyang Z. et al. Conservation of giant panda habitat in South Minshan, China, after the May 2008 earthquake // Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 2009. V. 7. № 7. P. 353–358. https://doi.org/10.1890/080192
Yamauchi H., Uchiyama H., Ohtani N., Ohta M. Unusual animal behavior preceding the 2011 earthquake off the pacific coast of Tohoku, Japan: A way to predict the approach of large earthquakes // Animals. 2014. V. 4. № 2. P. 131–145. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani4020131
Yosef R. Reactions of Grey Herons (Ardea cinerea) to seismic tremors // Journal für Ornithologie. 1997a. V. 138. № 4. P. 543–546. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01651385
Yosef R. Reactions of birds to an earthquake // Bird Study. 1997b. V. 44. № 1. P. 123–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/00063659709461047
Zhang Z., Yuan S., Qi D., Zhang M. The Lushan earthquake and the giant panda: impacts and conservation // Integrative Zoology. 2014. V. 9. № 3. P. 376–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/1749-4877.12068
Zhao C., Zhou L., Chen Z. Source rupture process of Lushan MS 7.0 earthquake, Sichuan, China and its tectonic implications // Chinese Science Bulletin. 2013. V. 58. № 28–29. P. 3444–3450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11434-013-6017-6
Zheng W., Xu Y., Liao L. et al. Effect of the Wenchuan earthquake on habitat use patterns of the giant panda in the MinshanMountains, southwestern China // Biological Conservation. 2012. V. 145. № 1. P. 241−245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.11.016
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 О.Ф. Лухнева, Т.В. Десятова, А.В. Новопашина, Я.Б. Радзиминович, В.Н. Митин, Е.А. Пономаренко