Artificial illumination near rivers may alter bat-insect trophic interactions

Russo, Danilo; Cosentino, Francesca; Festa, Francesca; Benedetta, Flavia de; Pejić, Branka; Cerretti, Pierfilippo; Ancillotto, Leonardo

doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2019.06.105

Cited by 42 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Increasing light pollution (Fouquet, 2006;Hölker et al, 2010), however, severely impacts both bats and moths (Cravens et al, 2018;Macgregor et al, 2019;Stone et al, 2009), with potential cascading effects on their predator-prey interactions, population dynamics, and ecosystems (Minnaar et al, 2015;Russo et al, 2019). While good evidence exists that light reduces the sound-evoked last-ditch maneuvers of eared moths, the effect of light on the moth's first line F I G U R E 2 Number of caught moths per playback treatment, per trap and per night.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Light pollution by artificial light at night (ALAN) has increased substantially over the last decades (Falchi et al., 2016; Fouquet, 2006; Hölker et al., 2010), adversely affecting plants and animals (Davies & Smyth, 2018; Knop et al., 2017; Longcore & Rich, 2004). The effects of light range from single individual's orientation, reproduction, and communication (Longcore & Rich, 2004) to whole communities, for example, by shifting the balance of predator–prey interactions (Bailey et al., 2019; Davies et al., 2013, 2014; Miller et al., 2017; Russo et al., 2019; Yurk & Trites, 2000). Echolocating bats and eared moths constitute a globally occurring predator–prey system of high ecological relevance (Boyles et al., 2011; Kasso & Balakrishnan, 2013; Kunz et al., 2011; Van Toor et al., 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Light might suppress both types of sound‐evoked antipredator flight in moths

Hügel

Goerlitz

2020

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urbanization exposes wild animals to increased levels of light, affecting particularly nocturnal animals. Artificial light at night might shift the balance of predator-prey interactions, for example, of nocturnal echolocating bats and eared moths. Moths exposed to light show less last-ditch maneuvers in response to attacking close-by bats. In contrast, the extent to which negative phonotaxis, moths' first line of defense against distant bats, is affected by light is unclear. Here, we aimed to quantify the overall effect of light on both types of sound-evoked antipredator flight, last-ditch maneuvers and negative phonotaxis. We caught moths at two light traps, which were alternately equipped with loudspeakers that presented ultrasonic playbacks to simulate hunting bats. The light field was omnidirectional to attract moths equally from all directions. In contrast, the sound field was directional and thus, depending on the moth's approach direction, elicited either only negative phonotaxis, or negative phonotaxis and last-ditch maneuvers. We did not observe an effect of sound playback on the number of caught moths, suggesting that light might suppress both types of antipredator flight, as either type would have caused a decline in the number of caught moths. As control, we confirmed that our playback was able to elicit evasive flight in moths in a dark flight room. Showing no effect of a treatment, however, is difficult. We discuss potential alternative explanations for our results, and call for further studies to investigate how light interferes with animal behavior.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Light might suppress both types of sound‐evoked antipredator flight in moths

Hügel

Goerlitz

2020

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Increasing light pollution (Fouquet 2006;Hölker et al 2010), however, severely impacts both bats and moths (e.g. Stone et al 2009;Cravens et al 2018;Macgregor et al 2019), with potential cascading effects on their predator-prey-interactions, population dynamics and ecosystems (Minnaar et al 2015;Russo et al 2019). While good evidence exists that light reduces the sound-evoked last-ditch manoeuvres of eared moths, the effect of light on the moth's first line of defence, negative phonotaxis, and thus the overall effect of light on moth anti-predator flight, is unclear.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Light pollution by artificial light at night (ALAN) has increased substantially over the last decades (Fouquet 2006;Hölker et al 2010;Falchi et al 2016), adversely affecting plants and animals (Longcore and Rich 2004;Knop et al 2017;Davies and Smyth 2018). The effects of light range from single individual's orientation, reproduction and communication (Longcore and Rich 2004) to whole communities, for example, by shifting the balance of predator-prey interactions (Yurk and Trites 2000;Davies et al 2013;Davies et al 2014;Miller et al 2017;Bailey et al 2019;Russo et al 2019). Echolocating bats and eared moths constitute a globally occurring predator-prey system of high ecological relevance (Boyles et al 2011;Kunz et al 2011;Kasso and Balakrishnan 2013;Van Toor et al 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Light might suppress both types of sound-evoked anti-predator flight in moths

Huegel

Goerlitz

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A decline was observed, however, in the fitness of non-tetragnathid orb-weaver species in the presence of ALAN [55,56]. Bats have been observed both taking advantage of ALAN [57], as well as avoiding artificially lit areas [58]. Predation rates of a wasp species increased under low levels of ALAN but decreased under high levels of ALAN [59].…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 96%

Artificial light at night at the terrestrial-aquatic interface: Effects on predators and fluxes of insect prey

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The outcomes of species interactions-such as those between predators and prey-increasingly depend on environmental conditions that are modified by human activities. Light is among the most fundamental environmental parameters, and humans have dramatically altered natural light regimes across much of the globe through the addition of artificial light at night (ALAN). The consequences for species interactions, communities and ecosystems are just beginning to be understood. Here we present findings from a replicated field experiment that simulated over-the-water lighting in the littoral zone of a small lake. We evaluated responses by emergent aquatic insects and terrestrial invertebrate communities, and riparian predators (tetragnathid spiders). On average ALAN plots had 51% more spiders than control plots that were not illuminated. Mean individual spider body mass was greater in ALAN plots relative to controls, an effect that was strongly sex-dependent; mean male body mass was 34% greater in ALAN plots while female body mass was 176% greater. The average number of prey items captured in spider webs was 139% greater on ALAN mesocosms, an effect attributed to emergent aquatic insects. Non-metric multidimensional scaling and a multiple response permutation procedure revealed significantly different invertebrate communities captured in pan traps positioned in ALAN plots and controls. Control plots had taxonomic-diversity values (as H') that were 58% greater than ALAN plots, and communities that were 83% more-even. We attribute these differences to the aquatic family Caenidae which was the dominant family across both light treatments, but was 818% more abundant in ALAN plots. Our findings show that when ALAN is located in close proximity to freshwater it can concentrate fluxes of emergent aquatic insects, and that terrestrial predators in the littoral zone can compound this effect and intercept resource flows, preventing them from entering the terrestrial realm.

show abstract

Artificial illumination near rivers may alter bat-insect trophic interactions

Cited by 42 publications

References 52 publications

Light might suppress both types of sound‐evoked antipredator flight in moths

Light might suppress both types of sound‐evoked antipredator flight in moths

Light might suppress both types of sound-evoked anti-predator flight in moths

Artificial light at night at the terrestrial-aquatic interface: Effects on predators and fluxes of insect prey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About