Surface activity patterns of macrofauna on pocket, tidal beaches: Insights into the role of wrack and artificial lighting

Slowly seeing the light: an integrative review on ecological light pollution as a potential threat for mollusks

“…González et al ( 2014 ) reported that the occupation level of communities of sandy beach beetles increases with the quality of the sky at night and is thus negatively affected by light pollution due to urbanization. These findings are partly in agreement with those for the impact of light pollution on the amphipod Orchestoidea tuberculate (Fanini et al 2016 ; Giaconni 2006 ; González et al 2014 ). For black-tailed godwits, there is also suggestive evidence that the nest location depends on the amount of surrounding light, with preferred nesting sites far away from road lighting (De Molenaar et al 2000 ).…”

Casting a light on the shoreline: The influence of light pollution on intertidal settings

“…Locomotor activity, a variable intuitively expected to be sensitive to light pollution, has been measured across most studies but has offered inconsistent results. While the activity of three of these species was drastically reduced in the presence of high (200 lx; Bregazzi and Naylor, 1972) or mid-level light pollution (60 lx; Luarte et al, 2016;Lynn et al, 2021a), it remained only slightly altered in other cases (Fanini et al, 2016;Dhouha et al, 2019). The same can be said about burrowing isopods such as Tylos europaeus in Tunisia, T. spinulosus in Chile and A. bipleura in Australia.…”

“…The same can be said about burrowing isopods such as Tylos europaeus in Tunisia, T. spinulosus in Chile and A. bipleura in Australia. While activity declined in the former two species, it remained unaltered in the latter one (Fanini et al, 2016). As suggested by Dhouha et al (2018), these responses seem to be dictated by the strength of the stressor (light intensity), although there are also methodological differences, which in the case of Fanini et al (2016) entailed the application of a recreation index (McLachlan et al, 2013) as a proxy of light pollution.…”

Habitat partitioning by mobile intertidal invertebrates of sandy beaches shifts with the tides

“…Activity patterns of intertidal sandy beach invertebrates have been related to species‐specific needs, such as burrowing to avoid predation and desiccation during the day or migrating to optimize feeding in the swash, on wrack, or on carrion on the sand surface at night when the temperature and predation risks are lower (Brown & McLachlan, 1990; Cardoso, 2002; Gibson, 2003; Naylor & Rejeki, 1996; Scapini et al, 1992). We would expect wrack availability to significantly influence both community composition and behavior (Dugan et al, 2003; Fanini et al, 2016; Michaud et al, 2019; Poore & Gallagher, 2013). However, we found no differences in wrack abundance between the spatial distribution surveys conducted during neap and spring tides in our study.…”

“…These movements can be in response to water levels and the distribution of resources, for example, wrack deposits, as well as avoidance of potentially negative biotic interactions, such as competition and predation (Colombini et al, 2013). Tides, a zeitgeber of the shore, may benefit sandy beach macrofauna by aiding their orientation and locomotion or providing cues to signal the need to relocate (Fanini et al, 2016; Rossano et al, 2008; Scapini, 2006; Scapini et al, 2019). Because they include many components (diurnal, semilunar, lunar, and longer) which drive much of the inundation and desiccation patterns on intertidal beaches it is likely they mediate the behavior of sandy beach organisms.…”