Degen Tobias, Mitesser Oliver, Perkin Elizabeth K, Weiß Nina-Sophie, Oehlert Martin, Mattig Emily, Hölker Franz
Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Mäggelseedamm 310, 12587, Berlin, Germany.
Institute of Biology, Freie Universität Berlin, Schwendenerstr. 1, 14195, Berlin, Germany.
J Anim Ecol. 2016 Sep;85(5):1352-60. doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12540. Epub 2016 Jun 13.
Artificial lights have become an integral and welcome part of our urban and peri-urban environments. However, recent research has highlighted the potentially negative ecological consequences of ubiquitous artificial light. In particular, insects, especially moths, are expected to be negatively impacted by the presence of artificial lights. Previous research with light traps has shown a male-biased attraction to light in moths. In this study, we sought to determine whether street lights could limit moth dispersal and whether there was any sex bias in attraction to light. More specifically, we aimed to determine sex-specific attraction radii for moths to street lights. We tested these hypotheses by collecting moths for 2 years at an experimental set-up. To estimate the attraction radii, we developed a Markov model and related it to the acquired data. Utilizing multinomial statistics, we found that attraction rates to lights in the middle of the matrix were substantially lower than predicted by the null hypothesis of equal attraction level (0·44 times). With the Markov model, we estimated that a corner light was 2·77 times more attractive than a wing light with an equivalentre attraction radius of c. 23 m around each light. We found neither sexual differences in the attraction rate nor in the attraction radius of males and females. Since we captured three times more males than females, we conclude that sex ratios are representative of operational sex ratios or of different flight activities. These results provide evidence for street lights to limit moth dispersal, and that they seem to act equally on male and female moths. Consequently, public lighting might divide a suitable landscape into many small habitats. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume (i) that public lighting near hedges and bushes or field margins reduces the quality of these important habitat structures and (ii) that public lighting may affect moth movement between patches.
人工照明已成为我们城市和城郊环境中不可或缺且广受欢迎的一部分。然而，最近的研究凸显了无处不在的人工照明可能带来的负面生态后果。特别是昆虫，尤其是飞蛾，预计会受到人工照明存在的负面影响。先前使用诱虫灯的研究表明，飞蛾对光的吸引存在雄性偏向。在本研究中，我们试图确定路灯是否会限制飞蛾的扩散，以及在对光的吸引方面是否存在任何性别偏差。更具体地说，我们旨在确定飞蛾对路灯的性别特异性吸引半径。我们通过在一个实验装置上收集飞蛾两年的时间来检验这些假设。为了估计吸引半径，我们开发了一个马尔可夫模型，并将其与获取的数据相关联。利用多项统计，我们发现矩阵中间区域对光的吸引率显著低于等吸引水平零假设所预测的水平（0.44倍）。通过马尔可夫模型，我们估计在每个灯周围约23米的等效再吸引半径下，角落的灯比边缘的灯吸引力高2.77倍。我们发现雄性和雌性在吸引率和吸引半径方面均无性别差异。由于我们捕获的雄性数量是雌性的三倍，我们得出结论，性别比例代表了操作性别比例或不同的飞行活动。这些结果为路灯限制飞蛾扩散提供了证据，并且它们似乎对雄性和雌性飞蛾的作用相同。因此，公共照明可能会将一个适宜的景观分割成许多小栖息地。因此，有理由假设：（i）树篱、灌木丛或田边附近的公共照明会降低这些重要栖息地结构的质量；（ii）公共照明可能会影响飞蛾在斑块之间的移动。
