ArticlePloS one2026
From concrete to canopy: Illuminating moth biodiversity in New York City's urban jungle.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Moths (Lepidoptera) are sensitive to anthropogenic threats and serve as valuable bioindicators. Despite the remarkable diversity and abundance of Lepidoptera globally, there is a lack of information on how moth species are impacted by urbanization. Notably, very little is known about moths in the most populus city of the United States, New York City, where pervasive urban pollutants, artificial light at night, land cover change, and habitat fragmentation are severe. We examined the effects of urbanization on moth biodiversity in New York City, with a focus on green spaces. We used citizen science records from iNaturalist and complemented these data with ground sampling at twelve locations across six parks at night. While the iNaturalist dataset is comprehensive both spatially and temporally, it failed to detect some species we observed on the ground. However, the scope of the field survey dataset is limited in geographical breadth and seasonal coverage. Overall, we found a negative relationship between greater urbanization and moth diversity, with community similarity related to environmental similarity. Our results found greater biodiversity with less light at night and less urban development, and more deciduous tree cover and more open land. Our structural equation model reveals additional insight: although we detected a strong direct negative effect of developed land on moth diversity, urbanization also negatively impacts diversity via indirect effects of reducing open space and deciduous tree cover. Developed open space alone does not directly affect diversity but may positively impact diversity through its covariance with vegetation cover. These findings support the importance of mitigating artificial light at night in urban green spaces and maintaining urban vegetation to ensure nocturnal Lepidoptera can persist in rapidly urbanizing landscapes.
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.