
doi: 10.14288/1.0447859
Over the past few centuries, human activity has introduced astoundingly bright light to the environment at a rapidly accelerating pace. Artificial light at night (ALAN) has detrimental effects on a wide range of organisms, including arthropods. To minimise impact, we must understand whether some taxa are more sensitive than others and whether certain lights are less perturbing. I designed a novel tool for introducing and monitoring ALAN, called ALANizer. I then installed 12 ALANizers in hedgerows and monitored arthropod activity using pitfall traps. I found that ALAN presence increased the total biomass of captured arthropods, the number of arthropods captured, and the total biomass divided by total count (average specimen weight per pitfall trap). I captured more Carabidae (ground beetles) and Isopoda (isopods) under lit compared to unlit treatments. I captured fewer Collembola (springtails) under amber-light treatments compared to white-light and unlit treatments. These findings reinforce existing evidence that arthropods respond to ALAN differently across taxa. However, I found few differences in taxonomic responses to amber LEDs compared to white LEDs.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
