ArticlePloS one2020
Artificial light at night at the terrestrial-aquatic interface: Effects on predators and fluxes of insect prey.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- National Park visitors perceive benefits for themselves and wildlife under blended red-white outdoor lighting.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The effects of artificial light at night on spider brains.Biology letters · 2024Article
- Spectral composition of light-emitting diodes impacts aquatic and terrestrial invertebrate communities with potential implications for cross-ecosystem subsidies.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Article
- A framework for untangling the consequences of artificial light at night on species interactions.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Review
- The Influence of Artificial Light at Night on Asthma and Allergy, Mental Health, and Cancer Outcomes: A Systematic Scoping Review Protocol.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Light pollution: a landscape-scale issue requiring cross-realm consideration.UCL open. Environment · 2022Review
- Anthropogenic noise and light alter temporal but not spatial breeding behavior in a wild frog.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral EcologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The outcomes of species interactions-such as those between predators and prey-increasingly depend on environmental conditions that are modified by human activities. Light is among the most fundamental environmental parameters, and humans have dramatically altered natural light regimes across much of the globe through the addition of artificial light at night (ALAN). The consequences for species interactions, communities and ecosystems are just beginning to be understood. Here we present findings from a replicated field experiment that simulated over-the-water lighting in the littoral zone of a small lake. We evaluated responses by emergent aquatic insects and terrestrial invertebrate communities, and riparian predators (tetragnathid spiders). On average ALAN plots had 51% more spiders than control plots that were not illuminated. Mean individual spider body mass was greater in ALAN plots relative to controls, an effect that was strongly sex-dependent; mean male body mass was 34% greater in ALAN plots while female body mass was 176% greater. The average number of prey items captured in spider webs was 139% greater on ALAN mesocosms, an effect attributed to emergent aquatic insects. Non-metric multidimensional scaling and a multiple response permutation procedure revealed significantly different invertebrate communities captured in pan traps positioned in ALAN plots and controls. Control plots had taxonomic-diversity values (as H') that were 58% greater than ALAN plots, and communities that were 83% more-even. We attribute these differences to the aquatic family Caenidae which was the dominant family across both light treatments, but was 818% more abundant in ALAN plots. Our findings show that when ALAN is located in close proximity to freshwater it can concentrate fluxes of emergent aquatic insects, and that terrestrial predators in the littoral zone can compound this effect and intercept resource flows, preventing them from entering the terrestrial realm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.