Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33139919›Full record

SynthesisNature ecology & evolution2021

A meta-analysis of biological impacts of artificial light at night.

Dirk Sanders, Enric Frago, Rachel Kehoe, Christophe Patterson, Kevin J Gaston

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nature ecology & evolution, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 118 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
118citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

118 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The Effects of Light on Vertebrate Welfare: A Review.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

58 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Dirk SandersEnvironment and Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter, Penryn, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2383-8693
Enric FragoCentre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement, Centre de Biologie pour la Gestion des Populations, Montpellier, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8817-1303
Rachel KehoeCentre for Ecology & Conservation, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Penryn, UK.
Christophe PattersonCentre for Ecology & Conservation, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Penryn, UK.
Kevin J GastonEnvironment and Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter, Penryn, UK. k.j.gaston@exeter.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7235-7928

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Natural light cycles are being eroded over large areas of the globe by the direct emissions and sky brightening that result from sources of artificial night-time light. This is predicted to affect wild organisms, particularly because of the central role that light regimes play in determining the timing of biological activity. Although many empirical studies have reported such effects, these have focused on particular species or local communities and have thus been unable to provide a general evaluation of the overall frequency and strength of these impacts. Using a new database of published studies, we show that exposure to artificial light at night induces strong responses for physiological measures, daily activity patterns and life history traits. We found particularly strong responses with regards to hormone levels, the onset of daily activity in diurnal species and life history traits, such as the number of offspring, predation, cognition and seafinding (in turtles). So far, few studies have focused on the impact of artificial light at night on ecosystem functions. The breadth and often strength of biological impacts we reveal highlight the need for outdoor artificial night-time lighting to be limited to the places and forms-such as timing, intensity and spectrum-where it is genuinely required by the people using it to minimize ecological impacts.

Indexed as

EcosystemLightAnimalsEnvironmentLightingPhotoperiod

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.