| Literature DB >> 28280562 |
Arnaud Da Silva1, Maaike de Jong2, Roy H A van Grunsven3, Marcel E Visser2, Bart Kempenaers1, Kamiel Spoelstra2.
Abstract
Light pollution is increasing exponentially, but its impact on animal behaviour is still poorly understood. For songbirds, the most repeatable finding is that artificial night lighting leads to an earlier daily onset of dawn singing. Most of these studies are, however, correlational and cannot entirely dissociate effects of light pollution from other effects of urbanization. In addition, there are no studies in which the effects of different light colours on singing have been tested. Here, we investigated whether the timing of dawn singing in wild songbirds is influenced by artificial light using an experimental set-up with conventional street lights. We illuminated eight previously dark forest edges with white, green, red or no light, and recorded daily onset of dawn singing during the breeding season. Based on earlier work, we predicted that onset of singing would be earlier in the lighted treatments, with the strongest effects in the early-singing species. However, we found no significant effect of the experimental night lighting (of any colour) in the 14 species for which we obtained sufficient data. Confounding effects of urbanization in previous studies may explain these results, but we also suggest that the experimental night lighting may not have been strong enough to have an effect on singing.Entities:
Keywords: dawn singing; experimental night lighting; light colour; light-emitting diode; songbirds
Year: 2017 PMID: 28280562 PMCID: PMC5319328 DOI: 10.1098/rsos.160638
Source DB: PubMed Journal: R Soc Open Sci ISSN: 2054-5703 Impact factor: 2.963
Figure 1.Estimates (±95% confidence interval) of the effects of the light treatment (blue for the white (light) treatment, green for the green (light) treatment and red for the red (light) treatment) on the onset of dawn singing relative to the onset in the control for 14 passerine species (see Material and methods). Light effects are significant when the confidence interval does not overlap zero. Species are ordered from earliest (bottom) to latest (top) singers (according to mean onset in the control). Sample sizes (number of recorded days) are given for each treatment and species next to each estimate.
Results of post hoc tests from linear mixed models (LMMs) showing the effects of the three light treatments on the onset of dawn singing relative to the dark control treatment in 14 passerine bird species. Positive estimates indicate later singing under the light treatment compared with the control, negative values indicate earlier singing. Species are ordered according to the mean onset in the control treatment. Sample sizes (number of recorded days) are given in brackets for each species. Next to the treatment for each species, we also provide the number of sites at which the species was heard on 5 or more days (5 days was chosen as an arbitrary cut-off to exclude rare singing events), to show the estimated sample size for each species.
| treatment | estimatesa | s.e.b | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| European robin | ||||
| white (4) | 2.5 | 7.7 | 0.3 | 1.0 |
| green (4) | 2.9 | 7.7 | 0.4 | 1.0 |
| red (4) | 2.5 | 7.7 | 0.3 | 1.0 |
| common redstart | ||||
| white (3) | 0.9 | 8.1 | 0.1 | 1.0 |
| green (3) | 3.4 | 8.5 | 0.4 | 1.0 |
| red (3) | 4.4 | 8.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| common blackbird | ||||
| white (5) | 4.4 | 6.9 | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| green (5) | 8.2 | 6.9 | 1.2 | 1.0 |
| red (5) | 11.6 | 7.0 | 1.7 | 0.9 |
| song thrush | ||||
| white (4) | 1.8 | 8.2 | 0.2 | 1.0 |
| green (5) | −2.5 | 8.0 | −0.3 | 1.0 |
| red (5) | −4.6 | 8.0 | −0.6 | 1.0 |
| Eurasian wren | ||||
| white (5) | 11.0 | 7.3 | 1.5 | 1.0 |
| green (5) | 13.1 | 7.3 | 1.8 | 0.8 |
| red (5) | 7.0 | 7.3 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| great tit | ||||
| white (7) | −1.2 | 6.6 | −0.2 | 1.0 |
| green (7) | −1.5 | 6.6 | −0.2 | 1.0 |
| red (7) | 0.4 | 6.6 | 0.1 | 1.0 |
| pied flycatcher | ||||
| white (6) | 0.9 | 7.0 | 0.1 | 1.0 |
| green (6) | 1.1 | 6.9 | 0.2 | 1.0 |
| red (6) | −2.0 | 6.9 | −0.3 | 1.0 |
| common chaffinch | ||||
| white (7) | 3.1 | 6.6 | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| green (7) | −1.9 | 6.6 | −0.3 | 1.0 |
| red (7) | −0.3 | 6.6 | −0.05 | 1.0 |
| crested tit | ||||
| white (4) | 9.3 | 7.8 | 1.2 | 1.0 |
| green (4) | 5.2 | 7.7 | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| red (4) | 2.2 | 7.7 | 0.3 | 1.0 |
| blue tit | ||||
| white (3) | 0.4 | 8.9 | 0.05 | 1.0 |
| green (2) | −4.4 | 9.2 | −0.5 | 1.0 |
| red (2) | 10.3 | 8.9 | 1.1 | 1.0 |
| willow warbler | ||||
| white (6) | −0.8 | 7.2 | −0.1 | 1.0 |
| green (6) | −7.0 | 7.2 | −1.0 | 1.0 |
| red (6) | −6.4 | 7.2 | −0.9 | 1.0 |
| short-toed treecreeper | ||||
| white (3) | −20.0 | 8.2 | −2.4 | 0.3 |
| green (2) | 6.1 | 8.5 | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| red (3) | −16.0 | 8.2 | −2.0 | 0.7 |
| tree pipit | ||||
| white (3) | 1.9 | 8.5 | 0.2 | 1.0 |
| green (4) | −17.7 | 8.4 | −2.1 | 0.6 |
| red (3) | −4.1 | 8.2 | −0.5 | 1.0 |
| coal tit | ||||
| white (3) | 8.2 | 8.2 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| green (2) | −1.0 | 8.3 | −0.1 | 1.0 |
| red (2) | 21.6 | 8.4 | 2.6 | 0.2 |
aMinutes relative to the dark control (negative values imply earlier singing under the light treatment).
bStandard error.
cp-Values after correction for multiple testing (42 comparisons).