Impacts of artificial light on food intake in invasive toads.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 04 2020
16 04 2020
Historique:
received:
06
11
2019
accepted:
27
02
2020
entrez:
18
4
2020
pubmed:
18
4
2020
medline:
1
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Artificial light at night (ALAN) is a major form of anthropogenic disturbance. ALAN attracts nocturnal invertebrates, which are a food source for nocturnal predators, including invasive species. Few studies quantify the effects of increased food availablity by ALAN on invasive vertebrate predators, and enhancement of food intake caused by ALAN may also be influenced by various environmental factors, such as proximitity to cities, moon phase, temperature, rainfall and wind speed. Revealing the potential impacts on invasive predators of ALAN-attracted invertebrates, and the influence of other factors on these effects, could provide important insights for the management of these predators. We constructed and supplied with artificial light field enclosures for invasive toads, and placed them at locations with different levels of ambient light pollution, in northeastern Australia. In addition, we determined the effect of rainfall, temperature, wind speed, and lunar phase on food intake in toads. We found that ALAN greatly increased the mass of gut contents of invasive toads compared to controls, but that the effect was increased in dark lunar phases, and when there were low ambient light pollution levels. Effects of rainfall, temperature and wind speed on food intake were comparatively weak. To avoid providing food resources to toads, management of ALAN in rural areas, and during dark lunar phases may be advisable. On the contrary, to effectively capture toads, trapping using lights as lures at such times and places should be more successful.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32300179
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-63503-9
pii: 10.1038/s41598-020-63503-9
pmc: PMC7162902
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
6527Références
Longcore, T. & Rich, C. Ecological light pollution. Front Ecol Environ 2, 191–198 (2004).
doi: 10.1890/1540-9295(2004)002[0191:ELP]2.0.CO;2
Gaston, K. J., Bennie, J., Davies, T. W. & Hopkins, J. The ecological impacts of nighttime light pollution: A mechanistic appraisal. Biol Rev 88, 912–927 (2013).
doi: 10.1111/brv.12036
Gaston, K. J., Visser, M. E. & Ho¨lker, F. The biological impacts of artificial lightat night: the research challenge. Phil Trans R Soc B 370, 20140133 (2015).
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2014.0133
Falchi, F. et al. The new world atlas of artificial night sky brightness. Sci Adv 2, e1600377 (2016).
doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1600377
Kyba, C. C. M. et al. Artifically lit surface of earth at night increasing in radiance and extent. Sci Adv 3, e1701528 (2017).
doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1701528
Rich, C. & Longcore, T. Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting. (Island Press, 2006).
Becker, A. et al. Potential effects of artificial light associated with anthropogenic infrastructure on the abundance and foraging behaviour of estuary associated fishes. J Appl Ecol 50, 43–50 (2013).
doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12024
Bird, B. L., Branch, L. C. & Miller, D. L. Effects of coastal lighting on foraging behavior of beach mice. Conserv Biol 18, 1435–1439 (2004).
doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00349.x
Dwyer, R. G. et al. Shedding light on light: benefits of anthropogenic illumination to a nocturnally foraging shorebird. J Anim Ecol 82, 478–485 (2012).
doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12012
Poot, H. et al. Green light for nocturnally migrating birds. Ecol Soc 13, 47 (2008).
doi: 10.5751/ES-02720-130247
Cabrera-Cruz, S. A., Smolinsky, J. A. & Buler, J. J. Light pollution is greatest within migration passage areas for nocturnally-migrating birds around the world. Sci Rep 8, 3261 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-21577-6
Bedrosian, T. A. et al. Chronic exposure to dim light at night suppresses immune responses in Siberian hamsters. Biol Lett 7, 468–471 (2011).
doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2010.1108
Dominoni, D., Quetting, M. & Partecke, J. Artificial light at night advances avian reproductive physiology. Proc R Soc B 280, 20123017 (2013).
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2012.3017
Rodrı´guez, A. et al. Factors affecting mortality of shearwaters stranded by light pollution. Anim Conserv 15, 519–526 (2012).
doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1795.2012.00544.x
Gaston, K. J. & Bennie, J. Demographic effects of artificial nighttime lighting on animal populations. Environ Rev 22, 323–330 (2014).
doi: 10.1139/er-2014-0005
Macgregor, C. et al. Pollination by nocturnal Lepidoptera, and the effects of light pollution: A review. Ecol Entomol 40, 187–198 (2014).
doi: 10.1111/een.12174
Bowden, J. An Analysis of Factors Affecting Catches of Insects in Light-Traps. Bull Entomol Res 72, 535–556 (1982).
doi: 10.1017/S0007485300008579
Bishop, A. L. et al. Moon phase and other factors affecting light-trap catches of Culicoides brevitarsis Kieffer (Diptera: eratopogonidae). Aus J Entomol 39, 29–32 (2000).
doi: 10.1046/j.1440-6055.2000.00144.x
Grubisic, M. et al. Insect declines and agroecosystems: does light pollution matter? Ann Appl Biol 173, 180–189 (2018).
doi: 10.1111/aab.12440
Wilson, J. F. et al. A role for artificial night-time lighting in long-term changes in populations of 100 widespread macro-moths in UK and Ireland: a citizen-science study. J Insect Conserv 22, 189–196 (2018).
doi: 10.1007/s10841-018-0052-1
Frank, K. D. Impact of outdoor lighting on moths: an assessment. J Lepidop Soc 42, 63–93 (1988).
Hill, D. The impact of noise and artificial light on waterfowl behaviour: a review and synthesis of the available literature. British Trust for Ornithol Rep 61 (1990).
Crawford, C. S. & Jones, P. E. Field notes on some amphibians from British G uiana. Copeia 2, 88–92 (1933).
doi: 10.2307/1437125
Ritchie, G. E. & Johnson, N. C. Predator interactions, mesopredator release and biodiversity conservation. Ecol Lett 12, 982–998 (2009).
doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01347.x
Thomas, J. R. et al. The impact of streetlights on an aquatic invasive species:Artificial light at night alters signal crayfish behaviour. Appl Anim Behav Sci 176, 143–149 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2015.11.020
Perry, G. et al. In Urban Herpetology (eds Mitchell, J. C., Jung Brown, R. E. & Bartholomew, B.) 239–256 (Society for the Study of Reptiles and Amphibians, 2008).
Newbery, B. & Jones, N. D. In Pest or Guest: the zoology of overabundance (eds. Lunney, D., Eby, P., Hutchings, P. & Burgin, S.) 59–65 (Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, 2007).
Zozaya, S. M., Alford, R. A. & Schwarzkopf, L. Invasive house geckos are more willing to use artificial lights than are native geckos. Austral Ecol 40, 982–987 (2015).
doi: 10.1111/aec.12287
Kearney, K. et al. Modelling species distributions without using species distributions: the cane toad in Australia under current and future climates. Ecography 31, 423–434 (2008).
doi: 10.1111/j.0906-7590.2008.05457.x
Shine, R. The Ecological Impact of Invasive Cane Toads (Bufo Marinus) in Australia. Q Rev Biol 85, 253–291 (2010).
doi: 10.1086/655116
Turvey, N. Cane toads: A tale of sugar, politics and flawed science. (Sydney University Press, 2013).
Phillips, B. L. et al. Predator behaviour and morphology mediates the impact of an invasive species: cane toads and death adders in Australia. Anim Conserv 13, 53–59 (2010).
doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1795.2009.00295.x
Doody, J. S. et al. Population-level declines in Australian predators caused by an invasive species. Anim Conserv 12, 46–53 (2009).
doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1795.2008.00219.x
Letnic, M., Webb, J. K. & Shine, R. Invasive cane toads (Bufo marinus) cause mass mortality of freshwater crocodiles (Crocodylus johnstoni) in tropical Australia. Biol Conserv 141, 1773–1782 (2008).
doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2008.04.031
O’Donnell, S., Webb, J. K. & Shine, R. Conditioned taste aversion enhances the survival of an endangered predator imperilled by a toxic invader. J Appl Ecol 47, 558–565 (2010).
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01802.x
van Dam, R., Walden, D. & Begg, G. A preliminary risk assessment of cane toads in Kakadu National Park. Supervising Scientist Report 164 (2002).
Davis, J. L., Alford, R. A. & Schwarzkopf, L. Some lights repel amphibians: implications for improving trap lures for invasive species. Int J Pest Manage 61, 305–311 (2015).
doi: 10.1080/09670874.2015.1058991
Gonza´lez-Bernal, E. et al. Toads in the backyard: why do invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina) prefer buildings to bushland? Popul Ecol 58, 293–302 (2016).
doi: 10.1007/s10144-016-0539-0
Shimoda, M. & Honda, K. Insect reactions to light and its applications to pest management. Appl Entomol Zool 48, 413–421 (2013).
doi: 10.1007/s13355-013-0219-x
Matsumura, M. The current status of occurrence and forecasting system of rice planthoppers in Japan. J Asia-Pacific. Entomol 4, 195–199 (2001).
Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology, http://www.bom.gov.au/?ref=logo (2019).
timeanddate.com, https://www.timeanddate.com/moon/phases/ (2019).
R Development Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, http://www.R-project.org/ (2019).
van Langevelde, F. et al. Declines in moth populations stress, the need for conserving dark nights. Glob Change Biol 24, 925–932 (2018).
doi: 10.1111/gcb.14008
Altermatt, F. & Ebert, D. Reduced flight-to-light behaviour of moth populations exposed to long-term urban light pollution. Biol Lett 12, 20160111 (2016).
doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2016.0111
Muller, B. J. & Schwarzkopf, L. Relative effectiveness of trapping and hand-capture for controlling invasive cane toads (Rhinella marina). Int J Pest Manage 64, 185–192 (2018).
doi: 10.1080/09670874.2017.1363443
Muller, B. J., Cade, B. S. & Schwarzkopf, L. Effects of environmental variables on invasive amphibian activity: using model selection on quantiles for counts. Ecosphere 9, e02067 (2018).
doi: 10.1002/ecs2.2067