Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36349582›Full record

ArticleBiology letters2022

Artificial light at night may decrease predation risk for terrestrial insects.

Gregory M Eckhartt, Graeme D Ruxton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology letters, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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 · 2023
    Review
  3. Article
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

2 authors.

Gregory M EckharttSchool of Biology, University of St Andrews, St Andrews KY16 9TH, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3478-386X
Graeme D RuxtonSchool of Biology, University of St Andrews, St Andrews KY16 9TH, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8943-6609

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial light at night (ALAN) is thought to be detrimental for terrestrial insect populations. While there exists evidence for lower abundance under ALAN, underlying mechanisms remain unclear. One mechanism by which ALAN may contribute to insect declines may be through facilitating increased predation. We investigated this by experimentally manipulating insect-substitute abundance under differential levels of light. We used insect-containing birdfeed placed at varying distances from streetlights as a proxy for terrestrial insects, inspecting the rate of predation before and after dusk (when streetlights are, respectively, off and on). We found that there was a significantly greater effect of increasing distance on predation after dusk, suggesting that predation was actually reduced by greater levels of artificial light. This may occur because ALAN also increases the vulnerability of insectivores to their own predators. Implications for foraging behaviour and alternative explanations are discussed.

Indexed as

Light PollutionPredatory BehaviorAnimalsInsectaartificial light at nightinsect declineinsect predationlight pollutionterrestrial insects

Identifiers

PMID36349582
PMCPMC9653218

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.