7

vocabulary will be employed to code the variables (e.g. publication type, dates, country, etc.), using thesaurus or ISO standards (e.g. ISO 639-1 for the language publication variable). To categorize the sources of noise and the outcomes (efects), we will use the review Shannon et al. [34] that give an example of categorization (see in this publication Table 2, page 988 about the sources of noise and Table 3, page 889 about the impacts of noise). Each selected article will be double coded by two reviewers. If, due to resource limitations, true double coding is not possible, an a posteriori check will be carried out by a second reviewer and potential disagreements will be discussed until a consensus is reached. Study map and presentation Where there is more than one study found in an article, each study will be recorded as a specifc entry in the database. Te database will be open access and included as an appendix to the systematic map publication. To ensure reusability and long-term preservation, the database will, Table 2 Inclusion/exclusion criteria for the three-stage screening process Exclusion criteria • Population: Domestic species or populations (e.g. cats, dogs, etc.) • Exposure: Studies that deal exclusively with natural noises (e.g. chorus frog) • Context: No restrictions on biogeographical zones Inclusion criteria • Population: All wild species, including in captivity (e.g. pandas in zoos). All terrestrial, aquatic and amphibious species • Exposure: - All man-made noises whatever the environment or media (terrestrial, aquatic, aerial) and the type of sounds (infrasounds, ultrasounds, etc.), including artifcially recreated noises (e.g. recorded road noise) and even abstract noises (e.g. white noise produced by a computer) - In-situ and ex situ experiments (e.g. studies in laboratories, zoological parks, aquariums, cages, etc.) • Outcomes: All outcomes related to the included populations, including but not restricted to biology/physiology (e.g. heart rate), use of space (e.g. species distribution, individual movements), intra and interspecifc communication (e.g. song frequencies), species reproduction, ecosystem composition (e.g. species richness, abundance) Sordello et al. Environ Evid (2019) 8:8 Page 6 of 7 if possible, be deposited as a.csv fle in a data repository such as Zenodo. Te fnal systematic map will include summary fgures and tables of the study characteristics. Possible knowledge gaps (un- or under-represented subtopics that warrant further primary research) and knowledge clusters (well-represented subtopics that are amenable to full synthesis by a systematic review) will be identifed e.g. by cross-tabulating key meta-data variables in heat maps (e.g. biological groups and outcomes). Based on these results, recommendations will be made on priorities for future research and mitigation of noise pollution. Additional fles Additional fle 1. Search string building process. Additional fle 2. List of eligible studies identifed by subject experts. Additional fle 3. Web of Science Core Collection database subscription details. Additional fle 4. Details on database indexation of the articles in the test list for the comprehensiveness calculation. Additional fle 5. Codebook of the inclusion/exclusion decisions at the three screening stages. Additional fle 6. Codebook of the systematic map database. Authors’ contributions RS is the project scientifc coordinator of the map. RS originated the idea of the systematic map, conducted the scoping stage and wrote the draft manuscript. BL assisted the team concerning methods and CEE guidelines. FF helped with the search strategy. SV brought her expertise about noise pollution public policies. All authors read and approved the fnal manuscript. Authors’ information RS, BL and SV are scientists. FF is an academic librarian. BL works at the French Collaboration for Environmental Evidence Center, hosted at FRB (Paris). Author details 1 UMS Patrimoine Naturel (PATRINAT), AFB-CNRS-MNHN, 36 rue Geoffroy-Saint-Hilaire CP41, 75005 Paris, France. 2 Fondation pour la Recherche sur la Biodiversité (FRB), 75005 Paris, France. 3 Université de Bordeaux, 33400 Talence, France. 4 Institut de recherche en sciences et technologies pour l’environnement et l’agriculture (Irstea), 13182 Aix-en-Provence, France. Acknowledgements RS thanks Nicola Randall for advice. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Availability of data and materials Data sharing is not applicable to the systematic map protocol in that no datasets were generated for this article. Datasets produced by the systematic map will be shared publicly. Consent for publication Not applicable. Ethics approval and consent to participate Not applicable. Funding This research is undertaken as current work of UMS Patrimoine naturel, a joint research unit funded by AFB French Biodiversity Agency, CNRS National Scientifc Research Center and MNHN National Museum of Natural History, on behalf of the French Ecology Ministry. Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional afliations. Received: 20 June 2018 Accepted: 11 January 2019 References 1. Amoser S, Wysocki LE, Ladich F. Noise emission during the frst powerboat race in an Alpine lake and potential impact on fsh communities. J Acoust Soc Am. 2004;116(6):3789–97. 

1   2    3    4    5    6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25