Use low intensity lighting

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    not assessed
  • Certainty
    not assessed
  • Harms
    not assessed

Study locations

Key messages

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




  • 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

  1. 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
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

Butterfly and Moth Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Butterfly and Moth Conservation
Butterfly and Moth Conservation

Butterfly and Moth Conservation - Published 2023

Butterfly and Moth Synopsis

What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust