While artificial lighting is a major component of global change, its biological impacts have only recently been recognised. Artificial lighting attracts and repels animals in taxon-specific ways and affects physiological processes. Being nocturnal, bats are likely to be strongly affected by artificial lighting. Moreover, many species of bats are insectivorous, and insects are also strongly influenced by lighting. Lighting technologies are changing rapidly, with the use of light-emitting diode (LED) lamps increasing. Impacts on bats and their prey depend on the light spectra produced by street lights; ultraviolet (UV) wavelengths attract more insects and consequently insectivorous bats. Bat responses to lighting are species-specific and reflect differences in flight morphology and performance; fast-flying aerial hawking species frequently feed around street lights, whereas relatively slowflying bats that forage in more confined spaces are often light-averse. Both highpressure sodium and LED lights reduce commuting activity by clutter-tolerant bats of the genera Myotis and Rhinolophus, and these bats still avoided LED lights when dimmed. Light-induced reductions in the activity of frugivorous bats may affect ecosystem services by reducing dispersal of the seeds of pioneer plants and hence reforestation. Rapid changes in street lighting offer the potential to explore

We used a before-after-control-impact paired design to examine the effects of a switch from low-pressure sodium (LPS) to light emitting diode (LED) street lights on bat activity at twelve sites across southern England. LED lights produce broad spectrum ‘white’ light compared to LPS street lights that emit narrow spectrum, orange light. These spectral differences could influence the abundance of insects at street lights and thereby the activity of the bats that prey on them. Most of the bats flying around the LPS lights were aerial-hawking species, and the species composition of bats remained the same after the switch-over to LED. We found that the switch-over from LPS to LED street lights did not affect the activity (number of bat passes), or the proportion of passes containing feeding buzzes, of those bat species typically found in close proximity to street lights in suburban environments in Britain. This is encouraging from a conservation perspective as many existing street lights are being, or have been, switched to LED before the ecological consequences have been assessed. However, lighting of all spectra studied to date generally has a negative impact on several slow-flying bat species, and LED lights are rarely frequented by these ‘light-intolerant’ bat species.

Emerging lighting technologies provide opportunities for reducing carbon footprints, and for biodiversity conservation. In addition to installing light-emitting diode street lights, many local authorities are also dimming street lights. This might benefit light-averse bat species by creating dark refuges for these bats to forage and commute in human-dominated habitats. We conducted a field experiment to determine how light intensity affects the activity of the light-opportunistic Pipistrellus pipistrellus and light-averse bats in the genus Myotis. We used four lighting levels controlled under a central management system at existing street lights in a suburban environment (0, 25, 50 and 100% of the original output). Higher light intensities (50 and 100% of original output) increased the activity of light-opportunistic species but reduced the activity of light-averse bats. Compared to the unlit treatment, the 25% lighting level did not significantly affect either P. pipistrellus or Myotis spp. Our results suggest that it is possible to achieve a light intensity that provides both economic and ecological benefits by providing sufficient light for human requirements while not deterring light-averse bats.

No abstract