Use low intensity lighting

Overall effectiveness category Awaiting assessment
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

not assessed
Certainty

not assessed
Harms

not assessed

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Artificial lighting disrupts the activity of nocturnal moths, for example altering feeding behaviour (van Langevelde et al. 2017). Brighter, higher intensity lights are likely to be more attractive, or to disrupt individuals over a wider area as the light reaches further into the darkness. Reducing the intensity of lights used at night may help to minimize the impact on moths, while maintaining lighting for people in key areas (Gaston et al. 2012).

^{Gaston K.J., Davies T.W., Bennie J., Hopkins J. (2012) Reducing the ecological consequences of night-time light pollution: options and developments. Journal of Applied Ecology, 49, 1256–1266.}

^{van Langevelde F., van Grunsven R.H.A., Veenendaal E.M. & Fijen T.P.M. (2017) Artificial night lighting inhibits feeding in moths. Biology Letters, 13: 20160874.}

Study locations

Key messages

One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of using low intensity lighting. This study was in Germany.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY)

Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in Germany found that fewer moths were attracted to low intensity lights (which also emitted a narrower range of yellow light with little UV) than to higher intensity lights (which also emitted broader spectra and included UV).

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A replicated, paired, controlled study in 1997 in three sites in a rural built-up area in Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany (Eisenbeis & Hassel 2000) found that lower intensity yellow lights attracted fewer moths than higher intensity and broader spectrum lights. Under lower intensity yellow lights (high-pressure sodium ellipsoid lamps, HSE), the number of moths caught (2–8 individuals/trap/day) was less than the number caught under higher intensity lights with a broader range of visible and ultra-violet (UV) light (high-pressure mercury-vapour lamp, HME: 8–28 individuals/trap/day; high-pressure sodium-xenon lamp in tube form, HSXT: 8–25 individuals/trap/day), but higher than at a trap with no light (0 individuals/trap/day). At each of three sites, three different light types (HSE: 50–70 W, yellow light with very little UV light; HME: 80 W, visible and UV light; HSXT: 80 W, visible and UV light) were compared to a control without light. From May–September 1997, flying insects (including moths) were sampled for 60 nights using flight eclector traps installed below each lamp.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Eisenbeis G. & Hassel F. (2000) Attraction of nocturnal insects to street lights: A study of municipal lighting systems in a rural area of Rheinhessen (Germany). Natur und Landschaft: Zeitschrift fur Naturschutz und Landschaftspflege, 75, 145-156.

Please cite as:

Bladon A.J., Bladon, E. K., Smith R.K. & Sutherland W.J. (2023) Butterfly and Moth Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for butterflies and moths. Conservation Evidence Series Synopsis. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Butterfly and Moth Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Use low intensity lighting Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link
Use ‘warmer’ (red/yellow) lighting rather than other lighting colours Action Link	Evidence not assessed	5	Synopsis Link
Use shielded “full cut-off” lights to remove outwards lighting Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link