Artificial lighting at night alters aquatic-riparian invertebrate food webs

The ecological impacts of nighttime light pollution have been a longstanding source of concern, accentuated by realized and projected growth in electrical lighting. As human communities and lighting technologies develop, artificial light increasingly modifies natural light regimes by encroaching on dark refuges in space, in time, and across wavelengths. A wide variety of ecological implications of artificial light have been identified. However, the primary research to date is largely focused on the disruptive influence of nighttime light on higher vertebrates, and while comprehensive reviews have been compiled along taxonomic lines and within specific research domains, the subject is in need of synthesis within a common mechanistic framework. Here we propose such a framework that focuses on the cross-factoring of the ways in which artificial lighting alters natural light regimes (spatially, temporally, and spectrally), and the ways in which light influences biological systems, particularly the distinction between light as a resource and light as an information source. We review the evidence for each of the combinations of this cross-factoring. As artificial lighting alters natural patterns of light in space, time and across wavelengths, natural patterns of resource use and information flows may be disrupted, with downstream effects to the structure and function of ecosystems. This review highlights: (i) the potential influence of nighttime lighting at all levels of biological organisation (from cell to ecosystem); (ii) the significant impact that even low levels of nighttime light pollution can have; and (iii) the existence of major research gaps, particularly in terms of the impacts of light at population and ecosystem levels, identification of intensity thresholds, and the spatial extent of impacts in the vicinity of artificial lights. © 2013 The Authors. Biological Reviews © 2013 Cambridge Philosophical Society.

1. Much concern has been expressed about the ecological consequences of night-time light pollution. This concern is most often focused on the encroachment of artificial light into previously unlit areas of the night-time environment, but changes in the spectral composition, duration and spatial pattern of light are also recognized as having ecological effects. 2. Here, we examine the potential consequences for organisms of five management options to reduce night-time light pollution. These are to (i) prevent areas from being artificially lit; (ii) limit the duration of lighting; (iii) reduce the ‘trespass’ of lighting into areas that are not intended to be lit (including the night sky); (iv) change the intensity of lighting; and (v) change the spectral composition of lighting. 3. Maintaining and increasing natural unlit areas is likely to be the most effective option for reducing the ecological effects of lighting. However, this will often conflict with other social and economic objectives. Decreasing the duration of lighting will reduce energy costs and carbon emissions, but is unlikely to alleviate many impacts on nocturnal and crepuscular animals, as peak times of demand for lighting frequently coincide with those in the activities of these species. Reducing the trespass of lighting will maintain heterogeneity even in otherwise well-lit areas, providing dark refuges that mobile animals can exploit. Decreasing the intensity of lighting will reduce energy consumption and limit both skyglow and the area impacted by high-intensity direct light. Shifts towards ‘whiter’ light are likely to increase the potential range of environmental impacts as light is emitted across a broader range of wavelengths. 4. Synthesis and applications. The artificial lightscape will change considerably over coming decades with the drive for more cost-effective low-carbon street lighting solutions and growth in the artificially lit area. Developing lighting strategies that minimize adverse ecological impacts while balancing the often conflicting requirements of light for human utility, comfort and safety, aesthetic concerns, energy consumption and carbon emission reduction constitute significant future challenges. However, as both lighting technology and understanding of its ecological effects develop, there is potential to identify adaptive solutions that resolve these conflicts.

Food-chain length is an important characteristic of ecological communities: it influences community structure, ecosystem functions and contaminant concentrations in top predators. Since Elton first noted that food-chain length was variable among natural systems, ecologists have considered many explanatory hypotheses, but few are supported by empirical evidence. Here we test three hypotheses that predict food-chain length to be determined by productivity alone (productivity hypothesis), ecosystem size alone (ecosystem-size hypothesis) or a combination of productivity and ecosystem size (productive-space hypothesis). The productivity and productive-space hypotheses propose that food-chain length should increase with increasing resource availability; however, the productivity hypothesis does not include ecosystem size as a determinant of resource availability. The ecosystem-size hypothesis is based on the relationship between ecosystem size and species diversity, habitat availability and habitat heterogeneity. We find that food-chain length increases with ecosystem size, but that the length of the food chain is not related to productivity. Our results support the hypothesis that ecosystem size, and not resource availability, determines food-chain length in these natural ecosystems.