Light Pollution: Definition, Measurement, Modeling and Environmental Impacts

B A R C E L O N A , C A T A L U N Y A
S E P T E M B E R 1 9 , 2 0 0 7
LIGHT POLLUTION:
Definition, legislation, measurement, modeling and
environmental effects
Petteri Teikari
petteri.teikar i@tkk.fi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... 2
1 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 4
2 Human visual system and light ................................................................................. 5
2.1 Human vision...................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Photometric units and laws ................................................................................................ 7
2.2.1 Luminous intensity (cd) ...............................................................................................................7
2.2.2 Luminous flux (lm) ......................................................................................................................7
2.2.3 Illuminance (lux) ..........................................................................................................................8
2.2.4 Luminance (cd/m
2
) .......................................................................................................................8
2.2.5 Luminous efficacy (lm/W)...........................................................................................................9
2.2.6 Lamberts law...............................................................................................................................9
2.3 Radiometric units................................................................................................................ 9
2.3.1 Radiant power (W) .....................................................................................................................10
2.3.2 Radiance (W/ster/m
2
) .................................................................................................................10
2.3.3 Irradiance (W/m
2
) .......................................................................................................................11
2.3.4 Radiant intensity (W/ster) ..........................................................................................................12
2.4 Astronomic units............................................................................................................... 12
2.4.1 Apparent magnitude (m) ............................................................................................................12
2.4.2 Absolute magnitude (M) ............................................................................................................13
2.4.3 Surface brightness (m/arcsec
2
, S10vis) .....................................................................................13
2.5 Light sources and lamp types........................................................................................... 14
2.6 Luminaire definitions ....................................................................................................... 17
3 Light pollution............................................................................................................ 18
3.1 Astronomical light pollution............................................................................................ 19
3.2 Ecological light pollution................................................................................................. 20
3.3 Light pollution laws.......................................................................................................... 21
3.3.1 Australia ......................................................................................................................................21
3.3.2 Canada.........................................................................................................................................22
3.3.3 Chile ............................................................................................................................................23
3.3.4 Czech Republic...........................................................................................................................23
3.3.5 European Union (EU).................................................................................................................23
3.3.6 Finland.........................................................................................................................................24
3.3.7 Italy..............................................................................................................................................24
3.3.8 New Zealand...............................................................................................................................25
3.3.9 Spain............................................................................................................................................26
3.3.10 United Kingdom.........................................................................................................................27
3.3.11 United States of America ...........................................................................................................27
4 Light pollution measurement .................................................................................. 28
4.1 Digital photography (Hollan et al., 2004) ....................................................................... 28
4.2 Portable spectrophotometer (Cinzano, 2004) ................................................................. 29
4.3 Night sky photometry with Sky Quality Meter (SQM, Unihedron).............................. 30
5 Light pollution modeling.......................................................................................... 31
5.1 Model for artificial night-sky illumination (Garstang, 1984) ........................................ 31
5.2 Software for classifying luminaires (Hollan, 2001) ....................................................... 34
5.3 ILLUMINA (Aub et al., 2005) ...................................................................................... 35
5.4 RoadPollution software (Cinzano, 2005)........................................................................ 37
5.5 GaussSeidel (GS) iterative technique (Kerola, 2006)................................................ 38
5.6 LPTRAN/LPDART Model (Cinzano, 2006).................................................................. 38
5.7 DIALux 4.3 (Upward Light Ratio Calculation) ............................................................. 39
6 Ecological effects........................................................................................................ 40
6.1 Plant physiology ............................................................................................................... 40
6.1.1 Phytochromes..............................................................................................................................40
6.1.2 Cryptochromes............................................................................................................................41
6.1.3 Phototropins................................................................................................................................42
6.1.4 Photoreceptor FKF1 ...................................................................................................................43
6.1.5 Conclusions.................................................................................................................................43
6.2 Animal physiology ........................................................................................................... 45
6.2.1 Birds ............................................................................................................................................45
6.2.2 Reptiles........................................................................................................................................48
6.2.3 Amphibians.................................................................................................................................49
6.2.4 Fishes...........................................................................................................................................52
6.2.5 Invertebrates................................................................................................................................53
6.3 Human physiology............................................................................................................ 54
7 Conclusions................................................................................................................. 55
8 References................................................................................................................... 56
Light Pollution: Definition, legislation, measurement, modeling and environmental effects
Introduction 4
1 INTRODUCTION
The use of artificial electric lighting has increased rapidly over the last hundred years both
in daytime and nighttime use allowing humans to adapt to 24 hour active society. However,
the increase in the use of exterior lighting during nighttime has produced undesirable side
effects known as light pollution. The term light pollution has been in use for a number
of years, but in most circumstances it has referred to the degradation of human views of the
night sky (hiding stars). In addition to this, artificial night lighting can have adverse effects
on wildlife as well as to humans. Light signal at wrong biological time can interfere with
the normal behavior of both plants and animals. In this work, the basics of the concept of
light pollution are reviewed.
Chapter 2 focuses on the basic characteristics of human vision, photometric (visible light)
and astronomic units, light sources and luminaires. This is followed by the further
definition of light pollution in chapter 3 including the legislation trying to regulate the
amount of exterior lighting. Chapter 4 and chapter 5 review briefly the measurement and
modeling methods used with light pollution. Chapter 6 then reviews the physiological
effects of artificial night lighting to plants, animals and humans. The main goal of this work
is to give a comprehensive review of the different aspects related to light avoiding too
detailed review.
Human visual system and light 5
Figure 2. The range of luminance values over which the visual system operates. At the lowest levels of
illumination, only rods are activated. Cones begin to contribute to perception at about the level of starlight and
are the only receptors that function under relatively bright conditions [1].
2 HUMAN VISUAL SYSTEM AND LIGHT
In this chapter human visual system is reviewed briefly for those parts that are relevant to
this work. The used quantities used in photometry, illumination engineering and astronomy
are reviewed briefly along with the typical light sources and luminaire types. The proper
understanding of this work is not possible if the contents of this chapter are not understood
at the basic level
2.1 Human vision
The human eye can only see light in the visible spectrum and has different sensitivities to
light of different wavelengths within the spectrum. Human eye consists of three types of
photoreceptors: rods, cones, and intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGC)
[1]. Rods and cones are responsible for the visual responses of light whereas ipRGCs
entrain human circadian rhythms to external light/dark cycle [2].
The rod system is specialized for vision at very low
light levels, but with the expense of poor spatial
resolution. When only rods are activated perception is
called scotopic vision. With only rods active it is
impossible to neither sense color differences nor make
exact visual discriminations. The cone system has a
very high spatial resolution, with color sensing abilities
in the expense of poor light sensitivity. At about the
level of starlight cones begin to contribute to vision and
they become more and more dominant as light levels
increase. At very high light levels such as in sunlight,
only cones are active and rods are totally saturated [3].
This condition is called photopic vision.
The area between scotopic and photopic vision is called
mesopic vision, which is characterized by contribution
of both rods and cones. The estimated upper limit of
luminance for mesopic vision is 3-10 cd/m
2
[4]. Figure 2
shows an estimate of different visual function in
logarithmic scale of luminance. Figure 1 shows the
action spectra for human vision under different lighting
conditions [5].
Figure 1. Spectral sensitivity functions of
the eye. In photopic vision, when cones
are active, the sensitivity follows the
function V() with a peak wavelength of
555nm. At very low light levels only rods
are active, and spectral sensitivity follows
V()-function with a peak wavelength of
505nm. The V
mes
() is one example of the
possible mesopic spectral sensitivity as
there is not a consensus on it yet. The
V
10
() is the photopic spectral sensitivity
for centrally fixated large target [5].
The discovery of non-image forming (NIF) photoreceptor was made by David M. Berson et
al. [2] in 2002. The novel photoreceptor is abbreviated as ipRGC (intrinsically
photosensitive retinal ganglion cells), or as mRGC (melanopsin-containing retinal ganglion
cell, mRGC) due to the photopigment responsible for the noticed non-image forming (NIF)
effects. Melanopsin was first discovered by Ignacio Provencio and his colleagues [6,7], and
is named by the cells in which it first was isolated: the dermal melanophores of frog skin.
The two main differences of ipRGCs compared to cones and rods, are that light depolarizes
ipRGC while the opposite happens with rods and cones; and ipRGCs are far more sluggish
compared to rod and cones, response latencies being as long as a minute.
The peak wavelength of circadian responses is shifted towards the blue end of the spectrum
compared to the traditional visual spectral sensitivities for photopic (V(),
max
=555nm),
mesopic (
max
between photopic and scotopic peak wavelengths) and scotopic (V(),
max
=508nm) vision. According to current knowledge, the peak wavelength seems to be
around 480 nm [8] for ipRGCs. There is a model for melatonin suppression by Rea et al.
[9] (Figure 3), which is a synthesis of an existing literature on melatonin suppression. The
model suggests a peak wavelength of 460 nm for melatonin suppression based on older
literature.
The conventional view has
been after the discovery of
ipRGCs that all non-image
forming (NIF) functions have
the same action spectra as it for
example have been found that
short-wavelength light (460
nm) is more effective in
alertness-promoting than light
at 550nm [10-12], but a recent
study by Revell et al. [13]
revealed that light at 420 nm
was more effective in alertness-
promoting than light at 470 nm.
This would mean that the
action spectrum presented for
melatonin suppression
[9,14,15] would not be accurate
for alertness promotion.
Human visual action spectra
0,000
0,250
0,500
0,750
1,000
1,250
400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600
Wavelength [nm]
R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
V' NIF
Figure 3. Estimated action spectra for human non-image forming (NIF)
visual functions by Rea et al. [9]. The model is derived from the
literature on melatonin suppression. It should be noted that the peak
wavelength of 460 nm in the model seem to be incorrect as well as light-
mediated alertness could have a peak wavelength closer to ultraviolet
light (< 400nm). Photopic and scotopic action spectra from Stockman et
al. [3].
2.2 Phot omet r ic unit s and laws
Photometry is the measurement of the intensity of electromagnetic radiation in photometric
units, like lumen/lux/etc, or magnitudes. The measurement is done with an instrument with
a limited, and carefully calibrated, spectral response. Lux/lumens/etc uses the standard
response curve for the eye, while astronomical photometry uses standard filters, with
standard spectral response curves, e.g. UBVRI photometry [16,17].
2.2.1 Luminous int ensit y (cd)
In photometry, luminous intensity is a measure of the wavelength-weighted power emitted
by a light source in a particular direction, based on the photopic spectral sensitivity curve
V(), a standardized model of the sensitivity of the human eye. The SI unit of luminous
intensity is the candela (cd), an SI base unit. One candela is defined as the luminous
intensity of a monochromatic 540 THz light source that has a radiant intensity of 1/683
watts per steradian, or about 1.464 mW/sr. The 540 THz frequency corresponds to a
wavelength of about 555 nm, which is green light near the peak of the eye's response. Since
there are about 12.6 steradians in a sphere, the total radiant intensity would be about 18.40
mW, if the source emitted uniformly in all directions. A typical candle produces very
roughly one candela of luminous intensity [18].
d
d
I (1)
Where, I = luminous intensity [cd]
] = luminous flux [lm]
e = solid angle of the radiated light [sr]
2.2.2 Luminous flux (lm)
In photometry, luminous flux or luminous power is the measure of the perceived power of
light. It differs from radiant flux, the measure of the total power of light emitted, in that
luminous flux is adjusted to represent the sensitivity of the human eye. The SI unit of
luminous flux is the lumen (lm). One lumen is defined as the luminous flux of light
produced by a light source that emits one candela of luminous intensity over a solid angle
of one steradian. In other systems of units, luminous flux may have units of power.
Luminous flux is often used as an objective measure of the useful power emitted by a light
source, and is typically reported on the packaging for light bulbs [19]. Mathematically
luminous flux can be calculated from radiant power in watts by weighing it with the V()
function:

nm 770
nm 380
, e m
d ) ( V K (2)
Where, ] = luminous flux [lm]
K
m
= , 683 lm/W
]
e,
= radiant power in watts [W]
V() = spectral sensitivity curve for photopic vision (Figure 1), luminous efficacy function
2.2.3 Illuminance (lux)
Illuminance is a specification of the quantity of light falling on or illuminating a surface.
The basic unit is the lux. A surface has an illuminance of 1 lux when it receives 1
lumen/m2 of surface area. Consider a small area on a piece of film that is 1 mm
2
. For light
with a wavelength of 540 nm, there are 3.8 x 10
15
photons per second per lumen. An
illuminance to the film of 1 lux would be equivalent to 3.8 x 10
2
photons per sec to a 1-
mm
2
area. The total light exposure to a film is found by multiplying the illuminance, in lux,
by the exposure time, in seconds, and is expressed in units of lux-seconds [20].
sr
d
I L
A
E
2
(3)
Where, E = illuminance [lx]
] = luminous flux [lm]
A = area of the surface [m
2
]
L = luminance [cd/m
2
]
p = reflective factor of a surface [%]
I = luminous intensity [cd]
d = distance between the light source and the surface [m]
2.2.4 Luminance (cd/m
2
)
Luminance is the light quantity generally
referred to as brightness. It describes the
amount of light being emitted from the
surface of the light source. The basic unit of
luminance (brightness) in USA is the nit,
which is equivalent to 1 candela per m
2
of
source area. In Europe cd/m
2
is used as an
unit for luminance. Another factor that
determines luminance is the concentration
of light in a given direction. This can be
described in terms of a cone or solid angle
that is measured in units of steradians (sr)
[20]. Sometimes an unit stilb [sb] is used
for luminance and one stilb is equivalent to
10,000 cd/m
2
.

E
cos A
I
L (4)
Where, L = luminance [cd/m
2
]
I
0
= luminous intensity to a direction 0 from the surface normal [cd]
A = area of the surface [m
2
]
0 = the angle between the surface normal and the specified direction
p = reflective factor of a surface [%]
E = illuminance [lx]
Figure 4. Illustration of the quantities luminance
and illuminance [20].
2.2.5 Luminous efficacy (lm/W)
Luminous efficacy is a property of light sources, which indicates what portion of the
emitted electromagnetic radiation is usable for human vision. It is the ratio of emitted
luminous flux to radiant flux. Luminous efficacy is related to the overall efficiency of a
light source for illumination, but the overall lighting efficiency also depends on how much
of the input energy is converted into electromagnetic waves (whether visible or not). In SI,
luminous efficacy has units of lumens per watt (lm/W). Photopic luminous efficacy has a
maximum possible value of 683 lm/W, for the case of monochromatic light at a wavelength
of 555 nm. Scotopic luminous efficacy reaches a maximum of 1700 lm/W for narrowband
light of wavelength 507 nm [21].
2.2.6 Lamber t s law
A Lambertian emitter is a light source which follows Lambert's
law, which says that the surface brightness is independent of
direction. The surface brightness can be expressed in candelas
per projected square meter (Figure 5 [22], i.e. per square meter
perpendicular to the direction of view). An illuminated perfect
diffusor is one example of a Lambertian light source. A sphere
which is a perfect diffusor, and which is illuminated only by
one point light source at infinite distance, will (other things
being equal) have a brightness exactly pi times smaller when
"half" compared to when "full". Cloud-covered Venus gets
fairly close to this ideal. The Moon deviates a lot from it: the
half Moon is only about 1/10 as bright at the full Moon [16].
The brightness of a flat Lambertian light source in candelas is:

cos
I
LA I
max
(5)
Where, I
max
= maximum luminous intensity [cd]
L = luminance [cd/m
2
]
A = area of a Lambertian surface
I
0
= luminous intensity to a direction 0 from the surface normal [cd]
2.3 Radiomet r ic unit s
Radiometry is the measurement of optical radiation, which is electromagnetic radiation
within the frequency range between 310
11
and 310
16
Hz. This range corresponds to
wavelengths between 0.01 and 1000 micrometers (m), and includes the regions commonly
called the ultraviolet, the visible and the infrared. Two out of many typical units
encountered are watts/m
2
and photons/sec-steradian. The only real difference between
radiometry and photometry is that radiometry includes the entire optical radiation spectrum,
while photometry is limited to the visible spectrum as defined by the response of the eye
[23].
Figure 5. Distribution of
luminous intensity (I) and
luminance (L) with a
Lambertian surface [22].
2.3.1 Radiant power (W)
Radiant power (radiant flux) is a SI derived unit. It is the derivative of energy with respect
to time, dQ/dt, and the unit is the watt (W). The recommended symbol for power is F (the
uppercase Greek letter phi). An acceptable alternate is P. Power is used for non-integrating
detectors and continuous sources. Energy is the integral over time of power, and is used for
integrating detectors and pulsed sources. Energy is an SI derived unit, measured in joules
(J). The recommended symbol for energy is Q. An acceptable alternate is W[23].
2.3.2 Radiance (W/st er /m
2
)
Radiance is a SI derived unit and is measured in W/sr/m
2
. Radiance is power per unit
projected area per unit solid angle. The symbol is L. Radiance is loosely related to the
concept of brightness as associated with luminous bodies (as luminance in photometry).
However, the use of brightness as a synonym for the photometric term luminance and for
the radiometric term radiance should be avoided. For example, according to US Federal
Standard 1037C [24], "brightness" should now be used only for nonquantitative references
to physiological sensations and perceptions of light.
Radiance is the derivative of power with respect to solid angle and projected area, and the
integral of radiance over area and solid angle is power [23]:
cos dA
d
dF
L (6)
Where, L = radiance [W/ster/m
2
]
F = power [W]
e = solid angle of the radiation [sr]
A = area of a surface
Radiance can also be defined in emitted photons from a particular area falling within a
given solid angle in a specified direction. First we need to define the relationship between
the energy of the photon and the frequency of the radiation (wave):
j [ eV
e
hc
e
hf
E
f

(7)
Where, E
f
= energy of a single photon [eV]
h = Plancks constant, 6.62610
-34
Js
f = frequency of light or radiation
e = charge of one electron, 1.60210
-19
C, 1 C = 1 J/eV
c = speed of light in a vacuum, 299 792 458 m/s
= wavelength of the radiation
From the equation it can be seen as the frequency of radiation increases, the energy of a
photon of that radiation increases. This also means in practice that when comparing
monochromatic blue and monochromatic red with the same radiant power, the blue light
contains less photons than the red light with the same radiant power. Number of photons of
per time unit (normally given per second) can be calculated using the following equation
[25]:
e E t
P
N
f

(8)
Where, N = number of photons per time unit
P = power of radiation [W]
t = time [s]
E
f
= energy of a single photon [eV]
e = charge of one electron, 1.60210
-19
C
The situation for photon emission for a Lambertian surface (emitting or reflecting) is
illustrated in Figure 6. Figure 2 represents what an observer sees. The observer directly
above the area element will be seeing the scene through an aperture of area dA
0
and the
area element dA will subtend a (solid) angle
of dO
0
. It can be assumed without loss of
generality that the aperture happens to
subtend solid angle dO when "viewed"
from the emitting area element. This normal
observer will then be recording IdOdA
photons per second and so will be
measuring a radiance of I
0
. The observer at
angle 0 to the normal will be seeing the
scene through the same aperture of area dA
0
and the area element dA will subtend a
(solid) angle of dO
0
cos(0). This observer
will be recording Icos(0)dOdA photons per
second, and so will be measuring a radiance
of [26]:
j [ sr) cm photons/(s
dA d
dA Id
dA ) cos( d
dA d ) cos( I
I
2
0 0 0 0
0

(9)
Where, I
0
= radiance measured by the observer [photons/(scm
2
sr)]
I = radiance from the emitting area [photons/(scm
2
sr)] ?
dO = the solid angle subtended by the aperture from the viewpoint of the emitting area element
dA = the area of the emitting Lambertian surface
dO
0
= the solid angle subtended by the aperture from the viewpoint of the observer
dA
0
= the area of the observing aperture
0 = the angle of the observer to the normal
2.3.3 Ir r adiance (W/m
2
)
Irradiance (flux density) is a SI derived unit and is measured in W/m
2
. Irradiance is power
per unit area (or photons/time/area) incident from all directions in a hemisphere onto a
surface that coincides with the base of that hemisphere. A similar quantity is radiant
exitance, which is power per unit area leaving a surface into a hemisphere whose base is
that surface. The symbol for irradiance is E and the symbol for radiant exitance is M.
Irradiance (or radiant exitance) is the derivative of power with respect to area, dF/dA. The
integral of irradiance or radiant exitance over area is power. Irradiance is equivalent in
radiometry to illuminance in photometry [23]. If a point source radiates light uniformly in
Figure 6. Observed intensity (photons/(scm
2
sr)) for a
normal and off-normal observer; dA
0
is the area of the
observing aperture and d is the solid angle subtended
by the aperture from the viewpoint of the emitting area
element.
all directions and there is no absorption, then the irradiance drops off in proportion to the
distance from the object squared, since the total power is constant and it is spread over an
area that increases with the square of the distance from the source. The distinction between
energy flux (W/m
2
) and photon flux (photons/time/area) is important in plant and animal
physiology as many physiological responses depend on the spectral content of radiation.
For example with photosynthesis, as photosynthesis is fundamentally driven by photon flux
rather than energy flux, but not all absorbed photons yield equal amounts of photosynthesis
[27].
2.3.4 Radiant int ensit y (W/st er )
Radiant intensity is another SI derived unit and is measured in W/sr. Intensity is power per
unit solid angle. The symbol is I. Intensity is the derivative of power with respect to solid
angle, dF/dw . The integral of radiant intensity over solid angle is power [23]. It is distinct
from intensity defined by irradiance or radiant exitance which measure radiation directed at
or emitted from a given surface area.
2.4 Ast r onomic unit s
The well-known astronomic unit is magnitude scale, which has been calibrated using
standard stars which (hopefully) do not vary in brightness. But how does the astronomical
magnitude scale relate to other photometric units? Here we assume V magnitudes, unless
otherwise noted, which are at least approximately convertible to lumens, candelas, and
luxes: [16]
1 mv= 0 star outside Earth's atmosphere = 2.5410
-6
lux = 2.5410
-10
phot
1 mv= 0 star per sq degree outside Earth's atmosphere = 0.8410
-2
cd/m
2
= 0.8410
-6
stilb
1 mv= 0 star per sq degree inside clear unit airmass = 0.6910
-2
cd/m
2
= 0.6910
-6
stilb
(1 clear unit airmass transmits 82% in the visual, i.e. it dims 0.2 magnitudes)
One star, Mv=0 outside Earth's atmosphere = 2.4510
29
cd
2.4.1 Appar ent magnit ude (m)
The apparent magnitude (m) of a star, planet or other celestial body is a measure of its
apparent brightness as seen by an observer on Earth. The brighter the object appears, the
lower the numerical value of its magnitude. Apparent magnitude is thus an irradiance or
illuminance, i.e. incident flux per unit area, from all directions. A star is a point light
source, and the incident light is only from one direction [16].
The scale upon which magnitude is now measured has its origin in the Hellenistic (Greek
origin) practice of dividing those stars visible to the naked eye into six magnitudes. The
brightest stars were said to be of first magnitude (m = 1), while the faintest were of sixth
magnitude (m = 6), the limit of human visual perception (without the aid of a telescope).
Each grade of magnitude was considered to be twice the brightness of the following grade
(a logarithmic scale). The modern system is no longer limited to 6 magnitudes or only to
visible light. Very bright objects have negative magnitudes. For example, Sirius, the
brightest star of the celestial sphere, has an apparent magnitude of 1.46. The modern scale
includes the Moon and the Sun; the full Moon has an apparent magnitude of 12.6 and the
Sun has an apparent magnitude of 26.73. The Hubble Space Telescope has located stars
with magnitudes of 30 at visible wavelengths and the Keck telescopes have located
similarly faint stars in the infrared [28].
2.4.2 Absolut e magnit ude (M)
In astronomy, absolute magnitude is the apparent magnitude, m, an object would have if it
were at a standard luminosity distance away from us, in the absence of interstellar
extinction. It allows the overall brightness of objects to be compared without regard to
distance. Absolute magnitude is thus a total flux, expressed in e.g. candela, or lumens. The
absolute magnitude uses the same convention as the visual magnitude, with a ~2.512
difference in brightness between step rates (because 2.5125 - 100). The Milky Way, for
example, has an absolute magnitude of about -20.5. So a quasar at an absolute magnitude of
-25.5 is 100 times brighter than our galaxy. If this particular quasar and our galaxy could be
seen side by side at the same distance, the quasar would be 5 magnitudes (or 100 times)
brighter than our galaxy [16,29].
2.4.3 Sur face br ight ness (m/arcsec
2
, S10vis)
Apparent magnitude per square degree is a radiance, luminance, intensity, or "specific
intensity". This is sometimes also called "surface brightness". Another unit for intensity is:
1 S10vis = the intensity (surface brightness) corresponding to one star of 10th (visual)
magnitude per square degree of the sky [16]:
1 S10vis = 0.6910
-5
cd/m
2
= 0.6910
-10
stilb (inside clear unit airmass)
Still another unit for intensity is magnitudes per square arcsec, which is the magnitude at
which each square arcsec of the extended light source shines.
Table 1. Comparison chart for magnitudes per square arcsec, S10vis, Nit and cd/m2 [16].
Nit = Candelas/m
2
Magnitudes per square
arcsec S10vis
inside unit airmass outside atmosphere
0 1.3010
11
9.010
4
10.910
4
5 1.3010
9
9.010
2
10.910
2
10 1.3010
7
9.0 10.9
15 1.3010
5
9.010
-2
10.910
-2
20 1.3010
3
9.010
-4
10.910
-4
25 1.3010
1
9.010
-6
10.910
-6
Table 2. The table below gives approximate intensities (surface brightnesses) of some natural light sources [16].
Luminance Magnitudes per square
Nit = cd/m
2
arcsec arcmin
Sun 310
9
-10.7 -19.6
Venus (max elong) 15000 +1.9 -7
Clear daytime sky (at horizon) 10000 3 -6
Full Moon 6000 +3.6 -5.3
Mars at perihelion 4000 +3.9 -5.0
Overcast daytime sky (at horizon) 1000 5 -4
Jupiter 800 +5.7 -3.2
Saturn 700 +5.9 -3.0
Heavy daytime overcast (at horizon) 100 8 -1
Uranus 60 +8.6 -0.3
Neptune 30 +9.3 +0.4
Sunset at horizon, overcast 10 10 1
Clear sky 15 min after sunset (horizon) 1 13 4
Clear sky 30 min after sunset (horizon) 0.1 15 6
Fairly bright moonlight (at horizon) 0.01 18 9
Moonless, clear night sky (at horizon) 110
-3
20 11
Moonless, overcast night sky (at horizon) 110
-4
23 14
Dark country sky between stars (zenith) 310
-5
24 15
Table 3. The table below gives approximate intensities (surface brightnesses) of some artificial light sources [16].
Luminance Magnitudes per square
Nit = cd/m
2
arcsec arcmin
Arc crater (plain carbon) 1.6109 -10 -19
Tungsten lamp filament 8106 -4 -13
High-pressure mercury vapor lamp 1.5106 -2 -11
Sodium vapor lamp 7105 -1.6 -10.5
Acetylene burner 1.1105 +0.4 -8.5
Candle 2104 +2.3 -6.6
2.5 Light sour ces and lamp t ypes
There are many types of lamps used in outdoor lighting, a much greater variety than are
familiar to most lighting users. Each type has applications where it is appropriate. Lighting
designers must evaluate a variety of factors when choosing lamps, including available
luminous outputs, output maintenance (how the lamp's output decreases with time),
efficiency, capital costs, life cycle costs,
color, size, lifetime, turn-on
characteristics, environmental factors such
as hazardous materials and effects on
wildlife, and availability of fixtures [30].
The most common lamp types (illustrated
in Figure 7) used in outdoor lighting are
reviewed shortly here in regard to their
basic technical specifications. The special
characteristics of different lamp types in
regard to light pollution are discussed
later. The less common or newer lighting
technologies such as light-emitting diodes
(LEDs), induction lamps, and others, are not discussed here, though they may occasionally
be seen in large projects such as bridge lighting.
Incandescent lamps are the lamps most familiar to homeowners; they are commonly used
for the majority of residential lighting, both indoor and outdoor. Light is produced by the
Figure 7. Examples of different lamp types: a) traditional
incandescent lamp, b) high-pressure mercury vapor
lamp, c) metal halide (MH) lamp, d) high-pressure
sodium (HPS) lamp, e) low-pressure sodium (LPS) lamp
[31].
passage of an electrical current through a tungsten wire in an evacuated or halogen-filled
glass or silica envelope. Advantages include low capital cost for lamps and luminaires,
wide availability, wide variety of both lamp and fixture types, lack of a warm-up period,
and lack of hazardous wastes. Disadvantages include short lifetimes (most less than a few
thousand hours), low efficiency (about 8-20 lumens/watt) with resultant high per-lumen
energy use and life cycle cost, attraction of insects, and high heat production. Generally the
use of incandescent lamps should be avoided [30].
Fluorescent lamps are also seen in residential lighting, and they predominate in indoor
retail and office uses, and are occasionally seen in outdoor area lighting, usually in smaller
or older installations. Light is produced predominantly by fluorescent powders coated on
the inside of the lamp that are activated by ultra-violet radiation produced by an electrical
arc through a low-pressure (about 2/1000th atmospheric pressure) mixture of gases
including mercury vapor. Advantages include low initial costs for lamps and fixtures
compared with the lamp types below, low life cycle costs and high efficiency compared to
incandescent (40-70 lumens/watt mean output), no warm-up period, good color rendition,
and long lifetimes (10,000 - 20,000 hrs). Disadvantages include higher initial costs
compared to incandescent lamps, large lamp size, low efficiency (compared to lamp types
below) and poor output maintenance, attraction of insects, and potentially hazardous
mercury waste [30]. Major disadvantage of fluorescent lamps is their poor performance in
cold climates such as in Scandinavian winter which limits their use in outdoor lighting.
Mercury vapor lamps (sometimes called high-pressure mercury, as distinguished from
fluorescent) were the first widely used high-intensity discharge (HID) lamps. Light is
produced by the passage of an electric arc through a small tube filled with mercury vapor at
high pressure (2-4 atmospheres). Though highly efficient and long-lived compared to the
incandescent lighting technology they displaced after the Second World War, they have
many disadvantages compared to other lighting sources available today, including low
luminous efficiency, poor color rendition, and high ultra-violet output. Mercury vapor
lamps have now been almost completely replaced in new applications by the more efficient
metal halide and high-pressure sodium lamps. One unusual characteristic of these lamps is
that they seldom "burn out," instead fading to lower and lower outputs over years or even
decades, though still consuming essentially the original amount of electrical power [30].
Metal halide lamps are HID lamps, similar to mercury vapor lamps but with the addition of
small amounts of various metallic halides, such as scandium, sodium, dysprosium,
holmium and thulium iodide. Light is produced, as in the mercury vapor lamp, by the
passage of an electrical arc through a small tube filled with mercury vapor and metal
halides at 2-4 times atmospheric pressure. The many different varieties of metal halide
lamps give a wide variety of slightly different color characteristics, though generally they
are white or blue-white sources. The technology is still evolving, and new types are
appearing regularly. Besides a relatively steep fall-off in intensity with time (compared to
high-pressure sodium; see below), many metal halide lamps also change their color as they
age. Metal halide lamps are very commonly used in commercial outdoor lighting where
white light with good color rendition is required or simply desired, such as car dealer
display lots, sports lighting, and service station canopies. Advantages include a wide
variety of moderate to high luminous output lamps (3500 - 170,000 lumens mean output),
high efficiency compared to incandescent and mercury vapor (45 - 90 lumens/watt mean),
and good color rendition. Disadvantages include lower efficiency and output maintenance
compared to high- and low-pressure sodium, shorter lamp lifetime compared to high-
pressure sodium, color changes, ultra-violet output if not adequately filtered, and
potentially hazardous mercury waste [30].
High-pressure sodium lamps are currently the most widely used HID lamps for roadway
and parking lot lighting, though in some areas metal halide is becoming more popular.
Light is produced by passing an electric arc through a small tube filled with sodium vapor
at about 1/4 atmospheric pressure, and a ballast and warm-up of about 10 minutes are
required. Advantages include a long lifetime, a wide variety of moderate to high luminous
output lamps (2000 - 120,000 lumens mean output), high efficiency and good maintenance
of luminous output compared to all lamp types except low-pressure sodium, moderate color
rendition compared to low-pressure sodium, and wide availability and moderate cost of
lamps and luminaires. Disadvantages include poorer color rendition than metal halide,
fluorescent and incandescent, poorer output maintenance and efficiency than low-pressure
sodium, and potentially hazardous mercury waste [30].
Low-pressure sodium lamps are widely used in parts of Europe and elsewhere, and in some
American cities, particularly those near active astronomical research facilities and those
especially concerned about energy issues and municipal electric bills. Light is produced by
the passage of an electrical arc through a tube filled with sodium vapor at about 6
millionths of atmospheric pressure. A ballast is required and 7-15 minutes are needed to
reach full output. The light produced by LPS lamps is nearly monochromatic at a
wavelength near 589 nanometers. Though the eye is very sensitive to this wavelength
(leading to the high efficiency of LPS), the eye cannot distinguish colors when LPS light is
the only source available. Low-pressure sodium lighting is favored where energy
consumption and costs are a major concern and where color discrimination is either not
needed or is supplied by other lighting. Advantages include the highest luminous efficiency
and lowest energy use, low glare associated with the large lamps, good visibility and low
scattering, minimal effects on insects and other wildlife, and lack of hazardous mercury
wastes. Disadvantages include the lack of color rendition, shorter lamp lifetime and higher
lamp replacement costs compared to HPS, and large lamp size in the higher output lamps
[30].
"Neon" or "luminous tube" lighting is a
term applied to a variety of small-diameter
glass-tube sources, generally used for
decorative purposes and signage. Light is
produced by the passage of electrical
current through the gas fill, producing light
with a color or spectrum characteristic of
the fill gas or gases and any phosphor
coating within the tubing. Luminous
outputs are not typically defined per lamp,
but rather per foot or per meter, and
depend principally on the fill gases and
diameter/current rating, but also to some
extent on the manufacturer and quality. Since luminous tube lighting is used for
applications taking advantage of the color variety and shape flexibility inherent in the
technology and not for area lighting, it is not meaningful to compare its advantages and
disadvantages to the lighting sources above. But such lighting can account for large total
outputs in some cases, particularly when used for architectural outlining, and it should not
be overlooked in lighting codes [30].
Incandescent Lamp Spectrum 700-350 nm
Mercury Vapor (MV) Lamp Spectrum 700-350 nm
Metal Halide (MH) Lamp Spectrum 700-350 nm
High-Pressure Sodium (HPS) Lamp Spectrum 700-350 nm
Low-Pressure Sodium (LPS) Lamp Spectrum 700-350 mm
Figure 8. Examples of the spectra of different light
sources [30].
Comparison of the spectral properties of the most common lamp types can be seen in
Figure 8 and Figure 9 [31]. It should be noted that especially the spectra of fluorescent
lighting (not shown in figures) and metal halide lamps can differ greatly depending on the
mixture of different fluorescent materials.
2.6 Luminair e definit ions
In addition to different light sources, there are several different types of luminaires with
different technical characteristics [32]. The
optics typically used in luminaires are
designed to focus light on a specific area
rather than radiation uniformly in all
directions. Figure 10 [33] illustrates the
coordinates used in the technical
specifications of luminaires. Figure 10a
shows the symbols used for different light
angles as normally the light beams is not
symmetric. The polar coordinate
illustration (Figure 10b) gives the amount
of candelas (cd) to a given direction.
The IES (Illuminating Engineering
Society of North America) cutoff criteria
(Figure 11) are often used to describe
roughly the light distribution of a given
luminaire. For these classifications, two
relevant zones are defined with respect to
the nadir of a luminaire (the nadir is
defined as the angle that points directly
downward, or 0, from the luminaire). One
zone applies to angles at or above 80
above nadir, and the second zone covers
all angles at or above 90 above nadir, or
above the horizontal plane of the
luminaire. Light emitted in the 80 to 90
zone is more likely to contribute to glare,
and light emitted above the horizontal is more likely to contribute to sky glow.
Full cutoff is the recommended type of light distribution in outdoor luminaires. In full
cutoff The luminous intensity (in candelas) at or above an angle of 90 above nadir is zero,
and the luminous intensity (in candelas) at or above a vertical angle of 80 above nadir does
not numerically exceed 10% of the luminous flux (in lumens) of the lamp or lamps in the
luminaire. [34].
Figure 9. Examples of the spectral power distribution (SPD) of different lamp types: (a) high-pressure mercury
vapor lamp, (b) metal halide (MH) lamp, (c) high-pressure sodium (HPS) lamp, (d) low-pressure sodium (LPS)
lamp [31].
Figure 11. Illustration of the IES Cut-off criteria
[54].
Figure 10. Illustration of the light distribution of a
luminaire: a) the basic coordinate system b) [33].
Light pollution 18
3 LIGHT POLLUTION
Light pollution is an unwanted consequence of outdoor lighting and includes such effects as
sky glow, light trespass, and glare. An illustration of both useful light and the components
of light pollution are illustrated in Figure 12 [35]. Sky glow is a brightening of the sky
caused by both natural and human-made factors. The key factor of sky glow that
contributes to light pollution is outdoor lighting. Light trespass is light being cast where it
is not wanted or needed, such as light
from a streetlight or a floodlight that
illuminates a neighbors bedroom at
night making it difficult to sleep. Glare
can be thought of as objectionable
brightness. It can be disabling or
discomforting. There are several kinds of
glare, the worst of which is disability
glare, because it causes a loss of
visibility from stray light being scattered
within the eye. Discomfort glare is the
sensation of annoyance or even pain
induced by overly bright sources.
Light pollution can be roughly divided into astronomical light pollution and ecological
light pollution. The latter refers to sky glow where stars and other celestial bodies are
washed out by light that is either directed or reflected upward. Ecological light pollution
then refers to artificial light that can disrupt interspecific interactions evolved in natural
patterns of light and dark, with serious implications for community ecology (plants,
animals and humans). In this chapter, the concept of light pollution is reviewed including
the brief overview of existing legislation on light pollution.
Light pollution is not simply an astronomical or ecological light pollution as with light
pollution enormous amounts of energy are wasted. For example, at the end of 1990s the
amount of sky glow was equivalent to 15 million kWh of energy over Sapporo, Japan; 29
million kWh over London, UK; and 38 million kWh over Paris, France [36]. Roughly
estimated the amount used for public outdoor lighting in Helsinki, Finland is 170 million
kWh [37] meaning that whole Helsinki could be illuminated with the waste light in Paris
over 5 days. With the light sent upward is estimated to produce economical losses worth of
billions of euros every year [38]. The wasted energy also means larger CO
2
emissions, and
it has been estimated by Philips that by replacing old-fashioned mercury vapor lamps with
modern lighting technology could reduce the CO
2
emissions by 3.5 million tons every year.
Economically this is equivalent to reduced annual costs of 700 million euros even though
part of the savings would be spent on the actual replacement process [39].
Figure 12. Light pollution is often caused by the way light is
emitted from lighting equipment. Choosing power
equipment and carefully mounting and aiming it can make a
significant difference [35].
Light pollution 19
3.1 Ast r onomical l ight pollut ion
Astronomical light pollution is characterized mainly by sky glow and the lost ability to
observe celestial objects due to bright night sky (illustrated in Figure 14 [40,44]). The
natural component of sky glow has five sources: sunlight reflected off the moon and earth,
faint air glow in the upper atmosphere (a permanent, low-grade aurora), sunlight reflected
off interplanetary dust (zodiacal light), starlight scattered in the atmosphere, and
background light from faint, unresolved stars and nebulae (celestial objects or diffuse
masses of interstellar dust and gas that appear as hazy smudges of light).
Electric lighting also increases night sky brightness and is the human-made source of sky
glow. Light that is either emitted directly upward by luminaires or reflected from the
ground is scattered by dust and gas molecules in the atmosphere, producing a luminous
background. It has the effect of reducing ones ability to view the stars. Sky glow is highly
variable depending on immediate weather conditions, quantity of dust and gas in the
atmosphere, amount of light directed skyward, and the direction from which it is viewed. In
poor weather conditions, more particles are present in the atmosphere to scatter the upward-
bound light, so sky glow becomes a very visible effect of wasted light and wasted energy
[35]. Draft graphics explaining where the artificial sky glow comes from can be seen in
Figure 13 [41]. The numbers are valid for ``CIE sky No. 5'' type of scattering (indicatrix
function, to be accurate), usual for a clear, but not extremely clear sky, and for ``zenith
extinction'' of 0.3 mag.
Amateur astronomers usually judge their skies by noting the magnitude of the faintest star
visible to the naked eye. However, naked-eye limiting magnitude is a poor criterion. It
depends too much on a person's visual acuity (sharpness of eyesight), as well as on the time
and effort expended to see the faintest possible stars. One person's "5.5-magnitude sky" is
another's "6.3-magnitude sky." One possible way for amateur astronomers to objectively
estimate the brightness of night sky is to use The Bortle Dark-Sky Scale [42], which is
Figure 13. The relationship between light scattering and the angle of illumination, and the contribution to total sky
glow [41].
Light pollution 20
nine-level scale based on the observation of celestial objects with specific surface
brightness.
When observing the night sky, professional astronomers often measure the dark portion of
the sky with their astronomical equipment to have a background value they can use to
compare their star signal against. Professional astronomers use an instrument called a
photoelectric photometer to make these measurements. Typically such measurements are
made at the zenith (in astronomical usage, zenith is the highest point in the sky, directly
above the observation point). Other methods to measure sky brightness are discussed in the
CIE technical report, Guidelines for Minimizing Sky Glow (CIE 1997) [43] and in separate
chapter later.
3.2 Ecological light pollut ion
Ecological light pollution refers to a type of
light pollution that alters natural light
regimes in terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems
[44]. For example Verheijen (1985) [45]
have proposed the term photopollution to
mean artificial light having diverse effects
on wildlife, but as this literally means
light pollution more describing term like
ecological light pollution is needed to
describe the impact of light to ecosystems.
There are several reviews of the potential
ecologic affects of light pollution [46-48] of
which the most current is the review of
Longcore et al. [44], and the book of same
Figure 15. Diagram of ecological and astronomical light
pollution [44].
Figure 14. Distribution of artificial lights visible from space. Produced using cloud-free portions of low-light
imaging data acquired by the US Air Force Defense Meteorological Satellite Program Operational Linescan
System. Four types of lights are identified: (1) human settlements cities, towns, and villages (white), (2) fires
defined as ephemeral lights on land (red), (3) gas flares (green), and (4) heavily lit fishing boats (blue). Image, data
processing, and descriptive text by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrations National Geophysical
Data Center [40,44].
Light pollution 21
authors [49]. More detailed ecological problems caused by artificial or unnatural light are
reviewed in Chapter 6.
In contrast to astronomical light pollution, light does not have to be especially bright or
pointed upwards (i.e. light does not have to contribute to sky glow) to disrupt ecosystems as
illustrated in Figure 15. Sources of ecological light pollution include sky glow, lighted
buildings and towers, streetlights, fishing boats, security lights, lights on vehicles, flares on
offshore oil platforms, and even lights on undersea research vessels, all of which can
disrupt ecosystems to varying degrees. The phenomenon therefore involves potential
effects across a range of spatial and temporal scales. In a nutshell, effected animals can
experience increased orientation or disorientation from additional illuminations and are
attracted to or repulsed by glare, which affects foraging, reproduction, communication, and
other critical behaviors [44].
Ecologists are also facing another problem when trying to measure the ecological effects of
the polluting light which is the definition of disrupting light. As seen with the chapter on
photometry, the illumination on a given surface is measured in luxes which is then a
weighed radiation unit fitted for human vision. Because other organisms perceive light
differently (e.g. green plants reflect the most the green part of spectrum to which is the
human the most sensitive to) including the wavelengths not visible to humans future
research on ecological light pollution should also involve the proper quantification of light
exposure to different organisms [44].
Ideally, ecologists should measure illumination in photons per square meter per second
with associated measurements of the wavelengths of light present. For example Gal et al.
[50] have calculated the response curve of mysid shrimp to light and reported illumination
in lux adjusted for the spectral sensitivity of the species. Another good example how the
use of lux ignores biologically relevant information, is high-pressure sodium (HPS) lamps.
HPS lamps will attract moths because of the presence of ultraviolet wavelengths, while
low-pressure sodium (LPS) lamps of the same intensity, but not producing ultraviolet light,
will not [51]. For this reason, the successful investigation of ecological light pollution will
require collaboration with ecologists, physical scientists and engineers to improve the
measurement methods of light characteristics at ecologically relevant levels.
3.3 Light pollut ion laws
In this chapter some of the existing laws and regulations on light pollution are reviewed
[52]. Currently the legislation on light pollutions is quite qualitative and rarely any detailed
instructions are given.
3.3.1 Aust r alia
Australian standard AS 4282-1997 [53] sets out guidelines for control of the obtrusive
effects of outdoor lighting and gives recommended limits for the relevant lighting
parameters to contain these effects within tolerable levels. As the obtrusive effects of
outdoor lighting are best controlled by appropriate design, the guidance given is primarily
applicable to new installations; however, some advice is also provided on remedial
measures that may be taken for existing installations. The standard refers to the potential
effects of lighting systems on nearby residents, users of adjacent roads and transport
signaling systems, and on astronomical observations. The standard does not apply to road
lighting; internally illuminated advertising signs; brightly-lit surfaces (e.g. floodlit
Light pollution 22
buildings and advertising signs); lighting systems installed for the purposes of television
broadcasting; and lighting systems that are of a cyclic or flashing nature.
3.3.2 Canada
The corporation of the town of Mississippi Mills has set a By-law (no. 03-62) to regulate
outdoor illumination and control light pollution to ensure responsible lighting, light
pollution abatement and the conservation of the night sky environment [54]. The By-law is
fairly detailed in regard what type of light fixtures are allowed for different applications
such as lights for: buildings and structures, including canopies and overhangs; recreational
areas; parking lot lighting; landscape lighting; billboards and signs; public and private
street lighting; display and service area lighting; public and private walkway lighting; rural
barn lights; residential yard lights; and outdoor lighting for all residential, commercial,
industrial, institutional and provincial and federal government uses not otherwise specified.
The recommended lamp type for outdoor lighting is low pressure sodium (LPS) lamp and
high pressure sodium lamp (HPS) is considered acceptable. The use of other high intensity
Figure 16. Examples of acceptable and unacceptable light fixtures according to by-Law no. 03-62 on lighting in the
town of Mississippi Mills [54].
Light pollution 23
discharge (HID) lamps (metal halide, mercury vapor) is accepted if they are properly
shielded. Incandescent and fluorescent lights are also acceptable if they are properly
shielded whereas the use of quartz halogen lamps is not recommended. By-Law states that
all new municipal outdoor street lighting must be Full-Cut-Off Fixtures installed in
accordance with IESNA standards. Some examples of acceptable lighting fixtures are given
in Figure 16.
3.3.3 Chile
According to the Ministry of Environment, Chile is the only country in the world (from
1998) with regulations in regard to emission limits (D.S. N 686/98 [55]) for light pollution.
This advanced legislation is greatly due to the great number of astronomical observatories
(e.g. Cerro Pachn, Cerro Tololo) in Chile [56].
The standard defines that a lamp with a luminous flux equal or less than 15 000 lm cannot
emit more than 0,8% of its nominal flux above horizontal level when installed to a
luminaire. For lamps with a luminous flux more than 15 000 lm should not emit more than
1,8% of their nominal flux above horizontal level when installed to a luminaire. The lamps
meant for outdoor lighting should have their spectrum limited to the area of visible
radiation (350 to 760 nm) and the luminous efficacy cannot be less than 80 lm/W (not
allowing the use of mercury vapor lamps). Different emission limits are given for projector
luminaires. For lamps with a luminous flux under 9 000 lm cannot emit more than 5% of
their nominal flux above horizontal levels, and lamps more powerful than 9 000 lm are
treated as normal lamps. Lamps meant for sports lighting should follow the limits given
after 2 am and the lamps used for billboard lighting after 1 am. Laser projectors cannot be
used pointing above horizontal level at all after 2 am. Standard also defines the conditions
for laboratory measurements of the lamps.
3.3.4 Czech Republic
The Czech law on Protection of the Air (signed Wednesday, February 27 and should be
valid since June 1, 2002) includes light pollution prevention [38,57]. For the light pollution,
the present draft of the regulations which should be issued by the government follows
closely the Lombardy law, the 0cd/klm (i.e., FS, Fully Shielded) rule is a key part of it.
Concrete measures in both light pollution and greenhouse emissions prevention are up to
future implementing regulations demanded by the law. The law allows a fine from CZK
500 to 150 000 (~18-5360 ) to be set by municipality upon a person, which violates at
least one of the obligations set by the law. Obligation is defined as: During activities in
places and areas set by the implementing regulation, everybody is obliged to obey the
dispositions of the municipality and, in accord with that, take measures to prevent the
occurrence of light pollution of the air.
3.3.5 Eur opean Union (EU)
In European Union there is a standard EN 12464(-2) [58], that loosely sets guidelines for
light pollution. This document, currently in draft format (April 2004), will lay down the
lighting requirements for various outdoor workplaces ranging from power stations to
railway yards in terms of lighting levels and uniformities. A further chapter on Obtrusive
Light will highlight the CIE/ILE recommendations [59] for limiting light pollution with
reference to one of four Environmental Zones as described in those documents.
Light pollution 24
3.3.6 Finland
The Finnish environmental protection law (4.2.2000/86) [60] does not give very detailed
regulations on light pollution. The law treats environmental pollution from human activity
(chemicals, energy, noise, vibration, radiation, light, heat or smell) which can either
individually or combined cause: a) health hazard, b) damage to the environment, c)
restriction of the use of natural resources, d) decrease of general habitability or cultural
values, e) decrease of environmental suitability for recreational use, f) damage to property
or to its use, or g) other similar damage to public or private property.
3.3.7 It aly
Regional laws against light pollution have been
already enforced in 13 Italians regions (Lombardia
17/00, Emilia-Romagna 113/03, Marche 10/02,
Lazio 23/00, Campania 13/02, Veneto 22/97,
Toscana 37/00, Piemonte 31/00, Valle d'Aosta
17/98, Basilicata 41/00, Abruzzo 12/05, Umbria
20/05, Puglia 15/05) which cover more than two
thirds of the Italian population and the main cities
(Milano, Roma, Venezia, Firenze, Bologna, Napoli).
In addition, three Italian technical standard rules
refers directly or indirectly to light pollution
(UNI10819, UNI10439, UNI9316) [61]. The laws
enforced in Italy by different regions can be seen in
Figure 17. Resume of the primary technical
measures against light pollution looks the following
[61]:
1) Provisions should be applied in the entire territory without ineffective subdivisions in
protected areas or poorly defined zoning because light pollution propagates very far
from sources.
2) Provisions need to be clearly applied to any NEW lighting installation, both public
and private.
3) Light pollution due to reflection by lighted surfaces should be limited by forbidding
over-lighting and enforcing the use of flux reducers at the proper time or the shut off
whenever possible. When a standard rule for safety exists, the average luminance or
illuminance should not surpass the minimum value required for safety (e.g. road,
walking and working areas). For other kinds of lighting a maximum luminance of 1
cd/m
2
should be permitted (e.g. building lighting).
4) Limitation of direct upward emission produced by fixtures in any direction above the
horizon, should be obtained by using a parameter depending on the direction of the
light and not on the integrated light flux. A good parameter is the light intensity per
unit of flux emitted by the light installation, in cd/klm. The light emissions at small
angles above the horizon (the first 45 degrees) should be limited very carefully
because they are the most effective in producing the adverse affects of light pollution.
5) The direct upward light emission of fixtures should be limited to 0 cd per 1000
lumens of flux emitted by the fixture, in any direction above the horizon (gamma
Figure 17. Light pollution laws (Italy) [61].
Light pollution 25
angle equal or greater than 90 degrees) for almost any kind of lighting installation. A
tolerance of 0.49 cd/klm is allowed in practice, because the limit is given as an integer
number and then the measurements can be approximated to the nearest integer.
6) Building and monuments should be lighted from top to bottom, with the same limits
given above for the upward lighting emissions, except in cases of proved
impossibility (in this case it should be permitted to light from bottom but the border
of the light beams should remain inside the boundaries of the lighted surface).
7) Lighting installations for large areas should complain to the same limits above (point
5).
8) Only lamps with the larger efficiency available for the requested use should be used.
They save energy and produce less light pollution outside the photopic band and
inside the scotopic band.
9) Upward directed light beams, beacons and similar luminous calls should be
prohibited, even because they distract car-drivers and endanger the road safety.
10) Penalties for not compliant installations should be proportional to the number of
fixtures.
11) The existing installations producing huge quantities of light pollution or belonging to
the most polluting categories should be adapted.
12) The lighting design made by a professional lighting engineer should be mandatory for
any lighting installation (except low power home installations with less than 5
fixtures). It should be completed with the photometries of fixtures in standard
EULUMDAT format and a report demonstrating the numerical compliance with these
rules.
The following prescriptions could also be added, whose precious effects of rationalization
have already been pointed out: 1) the yearly growth rate of the installed light flux for
nighttime outdoor lighting, public and private, in any municipal district cannot exceed the
2%; 2) the yearly growth rate of the electric power consumptions for nighttime outdoor
lighting, public and private, in any municipal district cannot exceed the 1,5%; 3) the
fraction of downward flux emitted by the lighting installation outside the surface to be lit
should be accurately minimized as much as possible. The limit on the yearly growth rate of
the electric power consumptions for nighttime outdoor lighting has been recently enforced
by law in some regions of Italy.
3.3.8 New Zealand
The Golden Bay County Council has passed the following Appendix for Outdoor Lighting
Code, as part of the Golden Bay District Scheme (New Zealand, November 1989): "The
purpose of this Code is to ensure that outdoor lighting does not unreasonably interfere with
the reasonable use and enjoyment of property within the district. It is the intent of this Code
to encourage the types, kinds, construction, installation, and use of outdoor electrically
powered illuminating devices, lighting practices and systems which will conserve energy,
while preserving the natural environment and increasing nighttime safety, utility, security,
and productivity." [62].
The general principle is similar to the other regulations on lighting. The lighting types are
divided into two classes depending on the need of color rendition. The class where color
Light pollution 26
rendition is unimportant can be operated anytime as long as they are shielded according to
the requirements of the specific lamp type. Laser source light and strobe lights and similar
high intensity light sources for advertising or entertainment shall not be projected above the
horizontal plane. Searchlights used for advertising or entertainment purposes are not
permitted. The permanent exemptions are for navigation, port, and airport lighting required
for the safe operation of ships and airplanes; and for emergency lighting by police, fire, and
rescue authorities.
3.3.9 Spain
In Spain, there are regional laws for autonomic regions of Spain. In Canary Islands there is
a Law 31/1988 of 31 October BOE num. 264 of 3 November [63] regulating light pollution,
electromagnetic pollution mainly from radio transmitters, and atmospheric pollution as the
law says that no industries, activities or services that may produce potential atmospheric
pollutants may not be established above an altitude of 1500 m. on the Islands of Tenerife
and La Palma. The law recommends the use of low-pressure sodium lamps in outdoor
lighting as they emit in a narrow band of the visible spectrum leaving the rest clean. The
most harmful lamp in outdoor lighting for
astronomy is the metal halide lamp that is
considered as an incorrect choice for
outdoor lighting. This is because of their
high UV content, which is the most
strongly dispersed by the atmosphere and
are of no value for illumination.. The
overview of the recommendations can be
seen in Figure 18.
In Catalonia, Law 6/2001 of 31 May (pg.
8682) [64,65] on the regulation of ambient
lighting for the protection of night
environment, regulates the light pollution.
The intention of the law is to provide
optimal conditions for nocturnal
environment (animals, plants and
ecosystems in general), promote energy efficiency, minimize domestic light pollution, and
to preserve the possibility to see the night sky. In regard to the law, a pilot program on the
evaluation and reduction of light pollution in Catalonia took place as a collaboration with
the Departament de Medi Ambient (Ministry of Environment in Catalonia), the Universitat
de Barcelona and the Universitat Politcnica de Catalunya. The first stage of the pilot
Program which took place between November 1999 and December 2000, was divided in
two parts. The first one was directed to the study of the outdoor light fixtures: their
characteristics and use as the source of the contamination. The second part goal was the
measurement of sky brightness in reference locations. These measurements, besides
establishing a comparison with the natural brightness, can as well be used as a reference
respect to which the future variations will be able to be measured. Currently in Valencia, in
Albufera Natural Reserve area [66] (5000 ha surface area) a project called Ecolight is
taking place [67]. Its objective is to correct the light pollution problems caused by exterior
public lighting.
Figure 18. Basic recommendations for lighting in Canary
Islands in regard to light distribution, lighting angle and
lamp type. HPS = high pressure sodium, LPS = low
pressure sodium[63].
Light pollution 27
3.3.10 Unit ed Kingdom
In Somerset County (UK), a local agenda 21 vision for Somerset (2001-2015) [68], was
drafted about how they would like the county to develop over the next 15 years. Its target in
regard to light pollution was: a reduction from 1999 levels of noise and light pollution.
The agenda did not give very detailed instructions how this could be achieved and only
included the following phrases on light pollution: The local authorities should identify the
worst examples of light pollution from domestic, commercial and highway sources. Those
responsible should be contacted with advice, particularly over the potential energy wastage,
and invited to take action to remove the cause. A public awareness-raising campaign should
also be mounted on noise and light pollution from domestic sources.
3.3.11 Unit ed St at es of Amer ica
In United States of America various different regulations and laws exist as the regulation is
being done on a state level. For those interested the different existing legislation can be
found from the web site of Internal Dark-Sky Association [69] listed by the state.
Light pollution measurement 28
4 LIGHT POLLUTION MEASUREMENT
The measurement of light pollutions is briefly reviewed here using digital photography,
spectrophotometer or a simple consumer-priced measured device. The more detailed
review of the used technologies is not within the scope of this work.
4.1 Digit al phot ogr aphy (Hollan et al., 2004)
The measurement of circadian effective luminance can be also done with non-scientific
cameras that offer raw format. Hollan [70] compared two commercial digital cameras (Fuji
S5000 and Canon EOS D60) for the
match of the sensitivity of blue pixels to
the action spectrum of the non-imaging
forming (NIF) human visual system. The
action spectrum used in the study was a
compound graph (Figure 19) modeled
from the results by Brainard et al. [71],
Thapan et al. [72], and Hankins and
Lucas [73]. Left wing of the curve was
corrected with the les transmissivity
curve taken from Stockman et al. [74].
The modeled formula consists of two
parts, for violet (V) and green (G) wing
separately. The wings match at the
maximum sensitivity (in the energy
domain, not a photon domain) at a
wavelength of maxS nanometers, maxS
= 460. For x = wavelength / 1 nm,
( ) ( )
3 2
maxS x bV maxS x aV ) x ( actspV + (10)
( ) ( )
3 2
maxS x bG maxS x aG ) x ( actspG + (11)
the constants are, aV = -7.57e 5
bV = 5.59e 6
aG = -1.30e 4
bG = 3.06e - 7
The examined cameras were calibrated using a solar spectrum. The images have been taken
with the appropriate angular height of the Sun in the sky, so that its light went through 1,5
times the thickness of the atmosphere. A CD-based cardboard spectroscope (with a lit from
two razors) had been used, after a series of attempts. Solar spectrum has a lower intensity at
a handful of wavelengths, so-called spectral lines. After processing the images, the solar
spectrum graph as recorded by the three types of camera pixels has been obtained. The
results can be seen in Figure 20, with the comparison of CCD-colors (Fuji S5000, Figure
20A) and CMOS-colors (Canon EOS D60, Figure 20B) to the three sensitivity functions
(photopic, scotopic, metabolic or circadian).
Figure 19. Action spectrum of melatonin suppression by light
after Brainard et al. [71], Thapan et al. [72], Hankins and
Lucas [73], corrected for lens absorption after Stockman et
al. [74]. Graph from Hollan [70].
From the two graphs, it can be seen that at least some CCD cameras can measure
melatonin-affecting light rather well according to the author [70]. All the needed software
is available at http://amper.ped.muni.cz/light/luminance for calibration of the camera.
However, it is pointed out that it is not easy to use, but what is important that the effective
amount of radiation affecting melatonin secretion can be documented for further use. It
should be also noticed that the spectral sensitivity curve for circadian visual system and the
blue CCD-sensor differ significantly from the shape of the sensitivity curve proposed by
Rea et al. [75]. This could be naturally corrected with specific optical filters placed in front
of the lens. As the study by Hollan [70] was a part of scotobiology (the study of biology as
affected by darkness [76]) research, the introduced method could be used to quantify the
light pollution affecting human and animal physiology as this area is relatively unknown
[77,78]. For example 5% of Czech population perceives unwanted artificial light from
outdoors as one of the two main causes of their sleep problems [79].
4.2 Por t able spect r ophot omet er (Cinzano, 2004)
Cinzano [80] presents a portable spectrophotometer for the measurement of light pollution.
The basic design goals were: 1) spectral coverage of the visual wavelength range from 400
nm to 1000 nm; 2) lightness, compactness and portability; 3) large field of measurement for
fast exposition times; 4) good equilibrium
between spectral resolution and fast
exposition time; 5) absolute calibration on-
site; 6) reasonably quick set-up on-site with
limited needs of time-expensive adjustments;
7) possibility of automatic mapping of the
entire sky with a series of spectra, with
automatic registration of position, elevation,
date, time, altazimuthal and equatorial
celestial coordinates; 8) automatic data
reduction; 9) low cost with easy available
components and control software. The device
provides maps of the night sky brightness in
any photometrical band of the visible spectral
range and in the light of main lamps.
(B) (A)
Figure 20. Comparison of the camera sensors to photopic, scotopic and proposed metabolic (circadian) spectral
sensitivity function. (A) Fuji S5000 CCD-sensitivity, and (B) Canon EOS D60 CMOS-sensitivity [70].
Figure 21. The WASBAM-SSH spectrophotometer
[80].
4.3 Night sky phot omet r y wit h Sky Qual it y Met er (SQM,
Unihedr on)
Unihedron Sky Quality Meter (SQM) [81] is an affordable (price ~$120) portable meter for
measuring sky brightness for astronomers (Figure 22). The meter uses a light-to-frequency
(TAOS TSL237 [82]) converter covered with Hoya CM-filter (filtering IR radiation) [83]
as a light sensor. The meter has an effective solid angle of 1.532 steradians [82] so it is not
a spot meter as it accepts light from a wide
cone (roughly 80 degrees diameter on the
sky). It measures the sky brightness in
magnitudes per square arc second. The term
magnitudes per square arc second means
that the brightness in magnitudes is spread
out over a square arcsecond of the sky. If
the SQM provides a reading of 20.00 that
would be like saying that a light of a 20th
magnitude star brightness was spread over
one square arcsecond of the sky. This can
be further converted into luminance
(candelas per square meter) using the
following equation:
[value in cd/m
2
] = 10.810
4
10
(-0.4*[value in mag/arcsec2])
(12)
Figure 23 shows the instruction how to measure sky brightness using the Sky Quality
Meter. The SQM's readings are based on the assumption of "best transparency" of the sky,
and if needed the reading of SQM could be
corrected using for example Clear Sky Clock [84]
or the data for the visibility from a local weather
station. Other disadvantage of the meter is that it
does not provide an external port for PC for
automated measurements.
The meter was tested and characterized by
Pierantonio Cinzano [85] from Light Pollution
Science and Technology Institute (ISTIL/LPLAB).
The SQM was analyzed with synthetic photometry
and laboratory measurements to find out the
relationship between the SQM photometrical
system and the main systems used in light pollution
studies. Also the conversion factors to Johnson's B
and V bands, CIE photopic and CIE scotopic
responses for typical spectra were evaluated, as well
as the spectral mismatch correction factors were
given when specific filters were added. In
conclusion it was found to be fine and interesting
of the night sky and useful for quantifying the light
pollution easily and accurately.
Figure 23. Instructions on the Sky Quality
Meter. 1) Point the SQM directly above at the
Zenith (the SQM sensor is on the same side as
the display). 2) The SQM should be held at or
above head level so that shadows or reflections
from your body do not interfere with the
reading. 3) Avoid using in areas that are
shaded by trees or buildings. 4) After you
press the button to take a reading, the SQM
will beep each second while it is accumulating
photons.[81].
Figure 22. Portable Unihedron Sky Quality Meter
(SQM). Size 9.5 x 6.0 x 2.5 cm[81].
Light pollution modeling 31
5 LIGHT POLLUTION MODELING
Several models have been developed to estimate the amount of light pollution. The model
proposed by Garstang et al. [86] in 1984 has been the basis of many models, incorporating
the parameters regarding city size and particle density, which is why it has been reviewed
here with the most detail. More developed models have been proposed recently but they
have been reviewed only briefly as the detailed review of those models in not within the
scope of this work.
5.1 Model for ar t ificial night -sky illuminat ion (Gar st ang, 1984)
Model proposed by Garstang et al. [86] is one of the first proper models taking account into
the main physical features in predicting the brightness of the night sky. Prior to the model
there had been numerous studies of light pollution over wider geographical areas [87-92]
and some attempts to construct a model to explain observations [93-95]. The situation in
the model is shown in Figure 24. The city is idealized as a circular area of uniform
brightness with center C and radius R, the city lying in a horizontal plane. The observer is
situated at O, at a height A above the plane of the city, and at a distance D from the center
of the city measured in the plane of the city (BC). The city is assumed to be at a height H
above the sea level. Real cities depart from this ideal due to exceptionally bright local areas
such as shopping centers and streamers (highways with ribbon development). Population P
and radius R are estimated using the data of an Atlas.
Authors initially assumed that artificial lighting produces an output of L lumens per head of
the population, so that the total light output is LP lumens. Large cities being somewhat
brighter than smaller cities (when corrected for population) due to large shopping centers,
brightly lit sports facilities, etc., which are often not found in smaller cities. After several
trials following equation was formulated:
Figure 24. Scattering of light by a city. Light from a small area at X is scattered at Q and received by the observer
O. Q is at a height h above the plane of the city, is the azimuth of Q, and z is the zenith distance of observation.
The observer receives light from a cone of semiangle around QO [86].
1 . 0
0
000 , 100
P
P L LP
,
_
(13)
Where, LP = total light output [lumens]
L
0
= constant for light output
P = population of a city
The exponent 0.1 is quite uncertain and it can be excluded in most cases and the factor
(P/100,000)
0.1
is a brightness enhancing factor. It is assumed that a fraction F of the light
produced by the city is radiated directly into the sky at angles above the horizontal, and that
the remainder (1-F) is radiated toward the ground. The fraction F is assumed to be radiated
with an intensity proportional to
4
, where is the zenith distance of an upbound light ray
(XQ in Figure 24), and the constant of proportionality is determined by normalization. It is
assumed also that of the fraction 1-F of light reaching the ground from artificial lights a
fraction G is scattered upward with a Lambert distribution, the remaining factor 1-G being
absorbed. The following equation can be written for I
up
total upward intensity in the
direction in lumens sterad
-1
:
( ) j [
4
up
F 554 . 0 cos F 1 G 2
2
LP
I + (14)
Where, I
up
= total upward intensity in the direction in lumens sterad
-1
LP = total light output [lumens]
G = fraction of upward scattered light with a Lambert distribution
F = fraction of the light produced by the city radiated directly into the sky
= zenith distance of an upbound light ray (XQ in Figure 24)
L can be replaced with L
0
(P/100,000)
0.1
if enhanced luminosity is wished to be used. The
coefficients 2 and 0.554 are introduced to give the correct normalization when I
up
is
integrated over the upward hemisphere. According to Ketvirtis [96], reflectivity for worn
asphalt ranges from 12%-14%, 16%-18% for dirty asphalt, 10% for new asphalt, and 25%
for new concrete. As most light is reflected from streets and parking lots, value of 15% for
G is adopted (G should be increased by about a factor of 4 if the ground were snow
covered). The amount of particles in the atmosphere is also estimated in the original work
by Garstang [86] for scatter prediction but is not reviewed here for the sake of clarity.
Authors have chosen axes x and y in Figure 24 so that CB is the x axis. Light from an
element of area dxdy at X(x,y) travels to Q, where it is scattered and some reaches the
observer O. Double scattering between X and Q increases the number of photons reaching
Q. Extinction takes place between X and Q, and between Q and O. The observer measures
the luminous flux arising within a cone of semiangle around the direction QO. The lengths
u, l, and d and the angles 0 and ] are defined as shown in Figure 24. The azimuth of OQ
measured from BC as zero is denoted by . Then the geometrical relationships are:
2 2 2
y ) D x ( d + (15)
2 2 2
A d l +
(16)
j [ ( ) ( ) z cos A sin z sin y cos z sin ) D x ( cos l + (17)
+ cos ul 2 l u s
2 2 2
(18)
+ cos u cos s l (19)
A z cos u h + (20)
cos s h (21)
For a given x, y, u, z, and these equations allow the calculation of d, l, 0, s, ], h, and .
The expression for the luminous flux , received at O by a telescope of area w from within
the cone of semiangle o, can be written:
( ) ( )
( )
( )
,
_
'
+ +
1
]
1
+
+

,
_

2
QO a 2 R 1
2 2
XQ 2
2
up
u
w
) EF ( f ) h ( N
16
2 cos
1 3 ) h ( N
du u DS EF
R
dxdy
s I
(22)
Where, I
up
s
-2
(dxdy/aR
2
) = flux per unit area falling on the scattering volume ao
2
u
2
du at Q from the area
dxdy of the city.
w/u
2
= solid angle of the telescope as seen from Q
(EF)
XQ
, (EF)
QO
= extinction factors
(DS) = double scattering correction
N
1
= molecular component of particle density
N
2
= aerosol component of particle density
f = scattering function
Authors denote the sky brightness by b in lamberts. Then the brightness is b/a lumens cm
-
2
sterad
-1
. If a radiation surface of area ao
2
u
2
is imagined at Q, the received flux can be
written as:
w b
u
w
u
b
2
2
2 2

(23)
Where, = luminous flux
b = sky brightness
o = semiangle (Figure 24)
These equations can be combined and insert the expressions for N
1
(h) and N
2
(h) and
introduce a parameter K measuring the ratio of aerosol No at ground level to molecular No
at ground level. Parameter K and the basic equation of this model for b can be given as:
) cH exp( KN 11 . 11 N
R m a a
(24)
Where, N
a
= aerosol particle density at ground level
o
a
= cross section integrated over the whole solid angle
K = measure of relative importance of aerosols and molecules for scattering light (indicator of the
clarity of the atmosphere)
N
m
= the sea level aerosol particle density (2.55 x 10
19
cm
-3
)
o
R
= integrated cross section for Rayleigh scattering estimation (4.6 x 10
-27
cm
2
molecule at an
assumed wavelength 5500 for visual observations [97])
c = constant X (0.104 km
-1
[98])
H = height above the sea level
( )
( )
'
+ +
1
]
1
+
+

Kf 11 . 11 ) ah exp(
16
2 cos
1 3 ) ch exp(
) DS ( ) EF ( ) EF ( s I du
R
dxdy
) cH exp( N b
QO XQ
2
up
0
2
R m
(25)
Where, h = the height of point Q above the city (Figure 24)
a = the reciprocal scale height for aerosols (0.657 + 0.059K)
5.2 Soft war e for classifying luminair es (Hollan, 2001)
Hollan [99] has created a simple command line DOS program to classify luminaires using
the EULumDat luminaire files provided by manufacturers. Given that current version of
DIALux (reviewed in chapter 0) provides more practical information to aid lighting design,
only the parameters for the program are reviewed here.
Program ies2tab converts IES photometric data to a table to standard output, or to a
line with summary data (including the cutoff category). EULumDat format works as well,
conversion to IES one is possible.
Its parameters are:
-a#: Albedo of the ground (default 0.10)
-c : write heading of Columns (just for an -l option)
-dp : compute sky luminance increment in distance instead of the overall one
(valid for the -l option); -di or -la30 are synonyma
-e[{i|m}[<name]] : EuLumDat format
-e as an input;
-ei makes an almost-ies file too (default name *.ies)
(almost: just due to letting >132 characters on a line)
-em as an output (default name *.ldt)
-f : assume the data giving the Full space angle of outcoming light
-h : Help
-i#: Indicatrix type (default 0, P.Cinzano (2000), 4..6 CIE types also possible)
-ic: Include Comment lines in the output table
-l : one Line output only
-la# : limiting angular height for computing the increment of sky luminance
in distance, default 30 (degrees);
this increment is then given for the -l option
-m : compute candela multiplier (if it is erroneously set to 1)
-r : output angles in Radians (to ease polar plots by gnuplot)
-s[#:[<name>]] : write filenames of <= cutoff categories to <name>
default limit is 1 (0=FCO, 1=FS, 2=CIE-CO, 4=IES-CO, 5=CIE-SCO...),
default name is sc.lis
-t[y]# : tilt of the luminaire / 1 degree, around y-axis (perp. to the road)
tx# : its tilt around x-axis (may be OK for long sloped roads)
-u[#:#:#:#] : compute illumination of a rectangle of
xmin:xmax:ymin:ymax luminaire heights, zero being below the luminaire
x axis going to 0 degrees and y to 90 degrees
(default -0.50:1.50:-3.00:3.00 pole heights);
-z#: extinction of light in Zenith / 1 mag (default 0.30)
[(C) Jan Hollan, N.Copernicus Observatory and Planetarium in Brno, 2001; subject to
the GNU General Public License, http://www.gnu.org/copyleft; source code available at
http://astro.sci.muni.cz/pub/hollan/programmes]
5.3 ILLUMINA (Aub et al ., 2005)
Aub et al. [100] have provided a new method named ILLUMINA linking spectral
measurements of artificial night sky glow and the predictions of a light pollution model.
The model computes 1
st
and 2
nd
order molecular and aerosol scattering, as well as aerosol
absorption onto a 3D grid. The model accounts for spatial heterogeneity in lighting angular
geometry, in lighting spectral dependence, in ground spectral reflectance and in topography
(including the computation of shadows). The basic idea is to stimulate the measurement of
a given light pollution spectral detector pointed toward the sky in any position and
orientation. Figure 25 gives a graphical representation of the used Aerosol Optical Density
(AOD) methodology.
Light pollution spectral measurement is done with the
Spectrometer for Aerosol Night Detection (SAND)
[101] which is a non-imaging long slit diffraction
grating-based instrument. The measuring method
focuses on the discrimination of some key spectral lines
which are representative of specific kinds of lighting
devices frequently used for street and commercial
lighting applications (high pressure sodium, metal
halide, low pressure sodium). With this instrument, it is
relatively easy to separate total light pollution into its
major contributing sources. Natural contribution to sky
brightness (aurora, moonlight, stars, etc) is easily
removed from the detected signal. This instrument was used recently for the 2005 Intensive
Light Pollution Spectral Monitoring Experiment, in California-Arizona-Utah [102].
The model was designed to simulate light scattered back to spectrometer, so that the model
does not allow the simulation of direct observation of the ground or any direct sight toward
a lighting device (Figure 26). Only the contribution of artificial light to the night glow is
implemented to the model excluding the contribution of celestial objects. The total spectral
flux (W/nm) entering the simulated spectrometer is given by:

n FOV
on
no no m
I
(26)
Figure 25. Graphical representation of
the night time AOD measurement
technique [100].
Where, I
no
= light spectral intensity (W/ster/nm) scattered toward the spectrometer by a model cell
crossed by the spectrometer line of sight;
O
no
= solid angle subtended by the spectrometer entrance as seen from scattering cell n
(Figure 26b)
O
on
= solid angle subtended by cell n as seen from the spectrometer position o
O
FOV
= solid angle of the spectrometer field of view (FOV)
The ratio O
on
/O
FOV
gives the ratio of light coming from a given cell n which will in fact
enter the instrument. In some cases, the spectrometer will see more (O
on
/O
FOV
> 1) than the
cell and sometimes less (O
on
/O
FOV
< 1). The model takes the sum over n to integrate the
light scattered along the spectrometer line of sight. It is assumed that I
no
may be mainly
explained by the combination of the first order scattering (with and without reflection on
the ground) and the second order scattering (again with and without reflection on the
ground). Thus, it can be written the following for I
no
:
According to the authors [100], ILLUMINA modeling tool is a significant innovation
compared to previous light pollution models created during the 1980s (mainly the model by
Garstang [86]). One of the most important innovations relies on the implementation of the
heterogeneous and complex nature of real environments e.g. in contrast to the model by
Garstang [86] which assumed that angular light emission functions as long as ground
reflectance values are
homogenous. Future work of
the authors will include the
verification of the
importance of near-horizon
light emissions, impact of
snow cover to light
pollution, the influence of
realistic aerosol optical depth
temporal variability on net
light pollution variability,
and an intercomparison with
previous models to ensure
the superiority of proposed
model to previous simpler
models.
2 r 2 1 r 1 no
I I I I I + + + (27)
Where, I
1
= the single scattered intensity
I
r1
= the first scattered intensity after reflection on the ground
I
2
= the second order scattering intensity
I
r2
= the second order scattering intensity after reflection on the ground
Figure 26. Modeling geometry and most important contribution to the
received flux by a spectrometer in position o. An example MSR was ~40
km and an example MRR was 50 m in a sensitive study for a city
with 4900 m radius done by the authors [100]. MSR = maximum
scattering radius , MRR = maximum reflective radius.
5.4 RoadPollut ion soft war e (Cinzano, 2005)
RoadPollution [103] is software for the analysis of road lighting installations and for the
evaluation of their environmental impact in terms of light pollution. The software is mainly
intended for two lane roadways but it could be used for more complex roads by properly
specifying the grid size and the observer position. It provides a detailed report including a
large number of parameters (Figure 27) which allow to quantify the quality of the lighting
design, its effectiveness in energy saving, its correspondence to the requirements for
minimizing light pollution and its compliance to laws against light pollution. However,
RoadPollution is not intended as lighting design software, even if it computes all typical
parameters like average maintained luminance, horizontal, vertical and semicylindrical
illuminances, uniformity, glare, luminance/illuminance distributions on the road and much
more. Lighting designers can profitably use RoadPollution to check the quality of their
design and to experiment how to improve energy saving and light pollution control. The
report obtained with RoadPollution can be attached to the lighting plan. Figure 28
demonstrates some of the output parameters given by RoadPollution software.
Figure 27. Overview of the RoadPollution software. The rightmost window shows the boxes where the input
parameters should be written and the button to start the computation. The leftmost window shows the results as
soon as the program compute it [103].
Input installation data:
lamp flux (klm) 6.500
road width (m) 7.0
luminaire spacing (m) 22.0
luminaire overhang (m) 2.5
luminaire height (m) 7.0
luminaire tilt (deg) 0.0
Light Pollution, integrated parameters:
reference out-of-road surfaces calculated for:
lambertian reflectance with rho=0.135 in average
direct upward flux ratio UFR % (Rn%): 2.20
road reflected upward flux ratio %: 6.39
(road reflected upward flux ratio for aged asphalt%: 6.24)
out-of-road reflected upward flux ratio %: 5.95
increase of upflux ratio due to direct emission % 34
increase of upflux ratio due to out-road emiss. % 93
direct unit uplight density DUUD (lm/m^2): 0.66
road unit uplight density RUUD (lm/m^2): 1.92
out-of-road unit uplight density WUUD (lm/m^2): 1.79
increase of uplight density due to direct emission %: 34
increase of uplight density due to out-road emiss. %: 93
Light Pollution, emispheric and low-angles scattering parameters
direct scattered flux factor % 1.64
road scattered flux factor % 3.26
out-of-road scattered flux factor % 3.04
increase of scattered flux due to direct emiss. % 50
increase of scattered flux due to out-road emiss.% 93
5.5 GaussSeidel (GS) it er at ive t echnique (Ker ola, 2006)
The model by Kerola [104] uses a straightforward Gauss-Seidel (G-S) iterative technique
[105] applied directly to the integrated form of Chandrasekhar's vectorized radiative
transfer equation for the calculation of the downwardly and upwardly directed radiances of
multiply scattered light from an offending metropolitan source. This model tries to improve
the accuracy of previous models especially with hazy atmospheres. According to the
authors, initial benchmark night-sky brightness tests of the present GS model using fully
consistent optical emission and extinction input parameters yield very encouraging results
when compared with the double scattering treatment of Garstang, the only full-fledged
previously available model.
5.6 LPTRAN/LPDART Model (Cinzano, 2006)
Cinzano [106] (2006) present up-to-date Extended Garstang Models (EGM), which provide
a more general numerical solution for the radiative transfer problem applied to the
propagation of light pollution in atmosphere. Cinzano also presents a LPTRAN software
package which is an application of EGM to DMSP-OLS radiance measurements and to
digital elevation data providing an up-to-date method to predict the artificial brightness
distribution of the night sky at any site in the World at any visible wavelength for a broad
range of atmospheric situations and the artificial radiation density in atmosphere across the
territory.
Figure 28. A part of the example output data given by the RoadPollution software in txt format [103].
5.7 DIALux 4.3 (Upward Light Rat io Calculat ion)
DIALux is a widely used light planning program for calculation and visualization of indoor
and outdoor lighting systems. DIALux is complete and free software with the ability to
import from and export to all CAD programs and photorealistic visualization with an
integrated ray tracer. DIALux is manufacturer-neutral and independent. [107].
The ULR (Upward Light Ratio) value is the percentage of luminaire flux of a luminaire or a
lighting installation that is emitted above the
horizontal, where all luminaires are considered in
their real position in the installation. Sky glow
limitations depend on the environmental zone of the
lighting installation. The standard defines four
environmental zone categories from E
1
to E
4
. E
1
category is used for intrinsically dark landscapes like
national parks or areas of outstanding natural beauty.
E
4
category is used for high district brightness areas
like city centers. Sky glow limitations reach from 0%
to 25%. DIALux considers only luminaire flux that
goes directly into the sky. Luminaire flux above the
horizontal, that is both used for lighting of vertical
structures such as facades, and is restricted to these
structures, will not be considered.
To minimize obtrusive light, EN 12464 not only gives limitations for ULR values but also
for luminous intensity values in obtrusive directions and light trespass into windows. These
limitations depend on the environmental zone category as well. Limitations for light
trespass into windows are given in lux. Values can easily be calculated with calculation
points and calculation surfaces. To calculate luminous intensity values in obtrusive
directions DIALux offers Luminous Intensity Calculation Points. Such points can be placed
just like any other calculation points. They consider all luminous intensities of all light
emitting surfaces of all placed luminaires. So for a luminaire with two brackets two values
are calculated. DIALux uses the luminaires LDC in the installed position, the luminaire
flux, the dimming level and the corrections factor, if applicable, for calculation. A
Luminous Intensity Calculation Point can be placed for each potential obtrusive direction.
Figure 29. Luminous flux that is taken
into account for the ULR value [107].
Ecological effects 40
6 ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
Possible adverse ecological effects of artificial night lighting to plants, animals and humans
are reviewed here. In general it can be seen that much more research is needed in every area
to properly quantify the ecological effects of adverse night lighting but in most areas the
groundwork has already been established.
6.1 Plant physiology
Plants physiology is affected by biotic and abiotic signals from their environment. Biotic
signals include attacks by insects and pathogens and grazing by larger herbivores. Abiotic
signals include temperature changes, changes in water availability, nutrient limitation,
osmotic stress, and changes in the light environment. The focus of this chapter is plant
photoreceptors, which detect the light signals and thus affect the physiological responses of
plants to light exposure. Although there is extensive literature on the effects of spectral
light quality, quantity and duration on plant growth and development, its focus has been
mainly to optimize the used artificial lighting for plant growth for example in greenhouses.
Recently the main focus of such research has been the use of LEDs for optimized plant
growth in greenhouses [108-111] and space exploration [112]. However, no rigorous
studies have examined the effects of artificial night lighting to plants except by the two
studies by Cathey and Campbell [113,114]. Currently, research is badly needed in this
neglected area of plant biology [49].
There are four photoreceptor families found in plant tissues: phytochromes, cryptochromes,
phototropins, and the photoreceptor FKF1. These photoreceptors mediate the physiological
and developmental responses in plants. Typically the studies on plant photoreceptors are
done with the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana of which many mutants exist lacking
specific photoreceptors. In this chapter, the different photoreceptors are not discussed at
highly detailed level and those interested in more extensive information should consult the
review articles for different families: Smith (1995, 2000) [115,116], Huq and Quail (2005)
[117], Tu and Lagarias (2005) [118] for phytochromes; Batschauer (2005) [119] and
Cashmore (2005) [120] for cryptochromes; Briggs and Christie (2002,2005) [121,122] for
phototropins; Briggs and Huala (1999) [123] for both cryptochromes and phototropins; and
Imaizumi et al. (2003) [124] for the photoreceptor FKF1.
6.1.1 Phyt ochr omes
he phytochromes are signal-transducing photoreceptors that convert between inactive and
active forms in response to different wavelengths of light. This conversion is used to
synchronize plant development to the exigencies of the light environment. The central
hypothesis of phytochrome action, proposed almost 50 years ago from pioneering
investigations by S. Hendricks, H. Borthwick and colleagues [125,126], is that the
photoreceptors exist in two, photoconvertible forms, Pr and Pfr. Pr is biologically inactive
and upon absorption of red photons is converted to Pfr, the active form. Pfr is converted
back to Pr by far-red photons. Biological action stems from Pfr [116].
The striking characteristic of the phytochromes is their reversible photochromismthe
property of changing color on photon absorption and
of reverting to the original form on the absorption of
another photon. The absorption maximum of the
phytochrome Pr form is close to that of the
chlorophylls (red light), but the Pfr form absorbs at
a longer wavelength (far-red light) [116]. In effect,
this means the phytochromes can be used as sensitive
estimators of the spectral changes that happen within
plant communities when daylight interacts with
photosynthetic structures [127]. The absorption
spectra for Pr and Pfr are presented in Figure 30. The
absorption spectra of the phytochromes peak at about
665 nm and 730 nm. The absorption bands overlap, so
radiation below about 700 nm activates
photoconversion of both Pr and Pfr.
Plants use the phytochromes as proximity sensors and
modify their growth and development, constituting
the shade-avoidance syndrome [115]. Upon sensing a
low red: far-red ratio, a shade-avoiding plant will
exhibit enhanced elongation growth and, if the
stratagem is successful, will project its leaves into
regions of unattenuated daylight. Phytochromes also
provide plants with temporal signals that entrain the
phases of the biological clock, and others that ensure
crucial developmental steps are initiated at
appropriate points in the life cycle. Endogenous
circadian rhythms synchronize development to the
changing seasons, as exemplified in the photoperiodic
control of flowering and dormancy. In these
processes, the phytochromes do not work alone; the
cryptochromes are often responsible for initiating
germination and they have important roles in de-
etiolation [116].
6.1.2 Cr ypt ochr omes
In the past few years great progress has been
made in identifying and characterizing plant
photoreceptors active in the blue/UV-A regions
of the spectrum. Recent studies have shown that
there is at least four different blue-light
activated signal-transduction pathways in
Arabidopsis and therefore presumably at least
four different blue-light photoreceptors [128].
These photoreceptors include cryptochrome 1
(cry1) and cryptochrome 2 (cry2) [123]. It
seems that cryptochromes participate in blue-
light-induced suppression of stem elongation,
Figure 30. The photoconversions involve a
number of intermediate forms in both
directions, and the establishment of an
equilibrium between Pr and Pfr takes
several minutes even at daylight irradiance
levels. The absorption spectra of the
phytochromes peak at about 665 nm and 730
nm. The absorption bands overlap, so
radiation below about 700 nm activates
photoconversion of both Pr and Pfr. Thus, in
daylight for example, a photoequlibrium of
about 60% Pfr/P (where P = total
phytochrome) is establishedin canopy
shade or crowded communities, the
photoequilibrium can be as low as Pfr/P =
0.1. This is the basis of the shade-avoidance
syndrome [116].
Figure 31. Absorption spectrum of CRY1 protein
expressed in baculovirus-infected Sf9 insect cells
[130]. Characteristics of absorption spectra are as
in published plant cryptochrome spectra
(Malhotra et al., 1995) [131].
cry2 being more sensitive to lower intensities of light than cry1 [129]. Thus, the two
cryptochromes are partly redundant in the growth suppression response but operate over
different light intensities. Present studies [130,131] suggest that the two Arabidopsis
cryptochromes (cry1 and cry2) share similar action spectra (Figure 31). However, the
possibility remains that they may also respond differently to changes in wavelength [129].
Recently [132,133], a third cryptochrome, cryDASH (subsequently named cry3), have been
found in several organisms including flies and humans in addition to Arabidopsis and
cyanobacterium. However, the role of cry3 in plants is not yet known.
6.1.3 Phot ot r opins
As noticed already, blue (390500 nm) and ultraviolet-A (UV-A; 320390 nm) light elicit a
variety of physiological responses in plants. Of these, there are four that maximize
photosynthetic potential in weak light and prevent damage to the photosynthetic apparatus
in excess light. These are phototropism [134] (growth- or turgor-driven movement of a
plant organ toward or away from a light source), light-induced opening of stomata (small
pores in the leaf and stem epidermis that regulate gas exchange by opening or closing in
response to various environmental
stimuli) [135,136], chloroplast
(organelles found in plant cells and
eukaryotic algae that conduct
photosynthesis) migration in response to
changes in light intensity [137] and solar
tracking by leaves of certain plant
species [134]. The action spectra for
phototropism [138-140], stomatal
opening [141,142], and the chloroplast
accumulation and avoidance responses
[143,144] are all similar (Figure 32).
They show a band with one major and
two minor absorption peaks in the blue
region of the spectrum and a broad
absorption band in the UV-A. These
spectral properties are characteristic of a
flavoprotein photoreceptor.
Phototropins 1 (phot1) and 2 (phot2) [145] are the most recently characterized blue-light
receptors in plants, have spectral properties that closely match these action spectra (Figure
32). Both phot1 and phot2 mediate not only phototropism, after which they were named,
but also blue-light-induced chloroplast migration [146-148] and stomatal opening [149]. In
addition, the rapid inhibition of stem growth [150-153] by blue light is probably mediated
by phot1 [154]. phot1 also plays a role in blue-light-mediated calcium uptake [155] and
might have a minor role in blue-light-induced membrane depolarization [154]. Although
significant progress has been made in understanding the early photochemical and
biochemical events that follow phototropin excitation, the details of how this excitation
activates such different responses (including the role of other photoreceptors) remain to be
elucidated [121].
Figure 32. Stylized action spectrum typically observed for
phototropin-mediated responses. Notice the presence of a
major peak at 450 nm, a shoulder at 425 nm and a minor
peak at 470 nm in the blue region of the spectrum. This fine
structure is not observed in the broad absorption band at
365 nm in the ultraviolet region of the spectrum[121].
6.1.4 Phot or ecept or FKF1
After the publication of the complete DNA sequence of the model plant Arabisopsis
thaliana used in photoreceptor studies, it became possible to search this database for
proteins related to the known photoreceptors. There are now three proteins, FKF1, ZTL,
and LKP2, each of which contains a single LOV (Light, Oxygen, or Voltage) domain,
highly similar to the LOV domains in the phototropins and showing the same unique
photochemistry. Otherwise, these proteins are entirely different from the phototropins [49].
The results by Imaizumi et al. (2003) [124] suggest that a crucial aspect of CO expression
involved in day-length discrimination may be generated by the circadian control of FKF1
expression and by the light-dependent function of FKF1. In addition, authors had provided
biochemical and genetic evidence showing that FKF1 functions as a photoperiodic
photoreceptor. Furthermore, their findings suggest that FKF1, ZTL and LKP2 constitute a
family of blue-light photoreceptors in Arabidopsis, while there is a bigger uncertainty with
ZTL and LKP2 than with FKF1.
Both the ground-state absorption spectra (Figure 33A) and the light-induced difference
spectra of FKF1 LOV domain
matched that of the phot1 LOV2
domain (Figure 33B, red
spectra), suggesting that they
have similar chromophore-
binding and light-induced
photochemistry [124]. In
contrast to phototropin LOV
domains, the FKF1 LOV
domain showed no appreciable
dark recovery (Figure 33B,
black spectra). The absorption
spectra of FKF1 had a
maximum at 450nm with
vibronic side bands and a
smaller peak in the ultraviolet-A
region (Figure 33A). After light
irradiation, there was a loss of
absorption at about 450 nm and
an increase in absorption at
around 390 nm, which is shown
as a difference spectra in Figure
33B.
6.1.5 Conclusions
In conclusion, the photoreceptors allow the plant to measure and respond to four
parameters of their light environment: light spectral quality, light intensity, light direction,
and light duration. In many cases, two or more photoreceptors share partial functional
redundancy, that is, they regulate the same developmental step or other response. That
evolution has provided plants with this manifold redundancy underlines the importance of
developmental transition from the dark-growth pattern to the light-growth pattern. Thus, a
Figure 33. (A) Absorption spectra of FKF1 LOV, phot1 LOV2 and
FKF1 LOV C91A. (B) Light-minus-dark difference spectra of FKF1
LOV, phot1 LOV2 and FKF1 LOV C91A. These spectra show the
light-induced absorbance changes (red spectra) and subsequent
spectral properties in the dark (black spectra) for FKF1 LOV and
phot1 LOV2. After a light flash, the difference spectra were taken
every 5 min for FKF1 or every 15 s for phot1 LOV2. The difference
spectra of FKF1 LOV C91A did not show any light-induced
absorbance changes. [124].
(A) (B)
mutation causing a loss of any one of these photoreceptors is not a fatal consequence
because others are adequate to do the job [49].
Sometimes these photoreceptors act independently, sometimes redundantly, sometimes
cooperatively, sometimes antagonistically, sometimes at the same stage of development.
Some of these responses are incredibly sensitive (light levels that are barely perceived by
the human eye), whereas others are activated only by high light intensities. Among the
many processes affected by light are seed germination, stem elongation, leaf expansion,
conversion from vegetative state to flowering state, flower development, fruit development,
cessation of leaf production (bud dormancy), and leaf senescence and abscission. From the
effects of light to plant physiology, the most important in regard to artificial night lighting,
is the effect of light to photoperiodism. Changes in the far red/red light ratio would be most
likely to cause problems since those are the wavelengths plants use for photoperiod
perception [49].
There are roughly four different response categories to the duration of light exposure:
plants failing to flower on long days but readily flowering on short days; plants flowering
on long days but not on short days; intermediate plants that flower only when the day is
neither too long nor too short; and day-neutral that flower only when they reach a certain
size independent of daylength which is typical of the largest number of species
[49,156,157]. Additionally it has been demonstrated that a light pulse as short as one
minute in the middle of a long night would prevent the cocklebur (Xanthium
pensylvanicum) from flowering [158,159]. Opposite to this, Downs (1956) [160]
demonstrated that a red light pulse in middle of a long night would induce a long-day plant
to flower. Thus both of these responses showed the red/far-red reversibility diagnostic for
phytochrome-mediated responses (reviewed more extensively by Sage (1992) [161]). This
phenomenon is often taken advantage by florists to extend the period of time over which
they have flowering plants for sale.
As noted already, the information how artificial lighting might affect photoperiodical and
other physiological responses is almost completely lacking. In general, the potential
ecological consequences of changes by abiotic factors (temperature, humidity, light) in
flowering phenology in urbanized areas are not well understood or explicitly studied (see
review by Neil et al. (2006) [162]). Cathey and Campbell (1975) [113,114] investigated the
effects of five types of lights (illuminance about 10 lux) used for outdoor lighting
(incandescent, high pressure sodium vapor, metal halide, fluorescent, and clear mercury
vapor) to wide variety of different plants during a 16-hour night. Flowering was noticed to
be delayed in some short-day plants, vegetative growth was enhanced in several tree
species, flowering was promoted in some long-day plants, and some species did not show
any measurable responses. The strength of response to the various types of light sources
was, in decreasing order, incandescent, high pressure sodium vapor, metal halide, cool
white fluorescent, and clear mercury vapor [113]. Their second article provides more
extensive information on the species-dependent differences in responses [114]. Without
doubt artificial lighting affects plants, however the short-term and long-term consequence
of such effects remain to elucidated, and further studies are needed badly in this area.
6.2 Animal physiology
The adverse effects of artificial night lighting to animal physiology are reviewed in this
chapter. It should be noted that when dealing with animals, their way to perceive to light
(regulating both non-visual and visual functions) can differ from significantly from
humans way to perceive light. The lux measurement places more emphasis on wavelengths
of light that the human eye detects best and less on those that humans perceive poorly.
Because other organisms perceive light differently including wavelengths not visible to
humans future research on ecological light pollution should identify these responses and
measure light accordingly.
Typically the research on the adverse effects of nocturnal lighting has focused on mammal
physiology the circadian disruption (i.e. problems in maintaining daily rhythms of
biological functions), but the research have been mainly done in laboratory conditions, and
phase shifts in circadian activity have been defined in a way that can be measured only in
laboratory [163].Only two studies [164,165] compared artificial light with daylight in terms
of their effects on the circadian clock. Mammal physiology is not discussed in this chapter
in very detail as the research is rather extensive in laboratory conditions, and the focus has
been on the less known effects of light pollution. Artificial night lighting is about as
effective as natural light in setting or disrupting the circadian clock, and it can shift the
circadian clock by 1-2 hours [166]. It can also be argued what is the optimal study design in
order to apply the results to real-life situations [167,168], as well as the statistical methods
used (equivalence testing [169,170], insignificance of significance testing [171]).
6.2.1 Bir ds
Many species of birds typically migrate at night, and it is well known that fires and
artificial lights attract birds during migration, particularly when the sky is cloudy and the
ceiling is low [172]. This attraction to lights has been used for example by villagers in
Jatinga, India to capture and kill birds for food using searchlights [173]. In Africa,
attraction to artificial lights has been used to enhance ecotourism [174]. However, the
mechanism how birds are attracted to light at night is poorly understood [45]. It has been
suggested that when a bird flies into lights at night it loses its visual cues to the horizon,
and uses the artificial lights instead, resulting in spatial disorientation [175]. It has been
noted also that immature migratory birds are more susceptible to disruption caused by
artificial lights than adults [176].
The visual system of birds differ from the human visual system as birds have five different
types of visual pigment and seven different types of photoreceptor: rods, double (uneven
twin) cones, and four types of single cones [177] in contrast to the three-cone system of
humans. The extra cone type of birds is responsive to wavelengths in the ultraviolet range
of the spectrum. In addition, bird eyes have oil droplets of different colors that narrow
receptor sensitivities [178,179]. The spectral sensitivities of different oil droplets, cones
and photopic vision are illustrated in Figure 34. It is likely that birds see the environment
differently than humans, and it is difficult to speculate how artificial light affects migrating
birds at night.
In addition to the possibility that artificial lighting disturb the visual cues used by migratory
birds, it has been demonstrated in the last decade that certain wavelengths of light appear to
influence the magnetoreception of compass information by migratory birds [180-183].
Three passerine bird species have shown normal orientation of migratory restlessness under
dim monochromatic light from the blue-green range of the spectrum, whereas they were
disoriented under yellow and red light [184]. However, it is not known how quickly red
light affects the magnetic compass or whether birds are actually using the magnetic
compass once a direction has been selected at the beginning of a migratory flight.
Early detailed studies on light attraction of
birds were conducted on the effects of
lighthouses and lightships on migrating birds
in the late 1800s [185]. The studies indicated
that fixed white lights were more deadly than
revolving or colored lights [186]. For example,
when the light beam of the lighthouse at Long
Point, Lake Erie, Ontario, Canada was made
narrower and dimmer in 1989, a dramatic
reduction in avian mortality occurred [187].
Mean annual bird kills dropped from 200 birds
in spring and 393 in autumn to 18.5 birds in
spring and 9.6 in autumn. However, these early
observations were not consistent with studies
by other others. For example, Munro [188]
reported that flashing and rotating lights
caused more mortality than fixed lights, and
Lewis [189] reporting that flashing white lights
causing the greatest mortality and fixed
beacons and red lights attracting fewer birds.
In a survey by Tufts [190], approximately half
of the 45 lighthouses reporting some mortality
had fixed lights and half had flashing lights.
The confusing results are more likely due to
the differences in lamp characteristics, such as
the wavelength and intensity which were not
reported in detail.
In the early 1900s when gas and kerosene
lanterns were replaced with electric lamps,
collision mortality decreased [191,192], but
with the increase of high illuminated man-
made structures the mortality of birds attracted
to high buildings have increased. In a report
published by World Wildlife Fund Canada and
the Fatal Light Awareness Program [193], it
was estimated that collision of migrating birds
to man-made structures and windows is a
world-wide problem that results in the
mortality of millions of birds each year in
North America. Similarly gas flares on
offshore oil and gas platforms and at oil
refineries also pose a threat to migrating birds
at night [194,195], and numerous reports of mass mortality have been reported [196,197].
Figure 34. Single cone spectral sensitivities calculated
from microspectrophotometric data: (A)
Absorptance spectra of single cone oil droplets in the
blue tit (Parus caeruleus). T, C, Y and R refer to the
transparent, colorless, yellow and red oil droplets
that filter light incident upon the UVS, SWS, MWS
and LWS cone visual pigments, respectively. (B)
Calculated relative photon catches of each of he
single cones. Visual pigment absorptance is
multiplied by oil droplet transmittance (1-
absorptance) and by the transmittance of the ocular
media (cornea, aqueous humor, lens and vitreous
humor. For display, photon catches have been
normalized relative to the SWS cone. (C) Relative
photopic spectral sensitivity. LWS, MWS, SWS and
UVS/VS refer to the long, medium, short and
extreme short wavelength-sensitive cone visual
pigments, respectively [177].
Television and FM radio station towers have increased in height above ground level since
they were first constructed in the late 1940s, and in the mid-1960s it was estimated that
television towers in the United States killed more than a million birds per year [198]. Taller
towers need more stabilizing guylines and warning lights for aircraft, which are held
responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of birds during nocturnal migration.
However recent studies [199,200] indicate a decline in the number of tower fatalities over
the last 20 years despite the increased heights. The specific roles of evolutionary
adaptation, behavioral habituation, declining populations of migratory birds, changing
weather conditions, and changes in tower lighting systems as possible explanations for such
declines however are not yet known in detail [200,201]. Bird kills at tall lighted structures
in the United States and at Dutch lighthouses show similar lunar periodicity [202-204],
most kills occurring around the new moon while almost none of the kills occur around full
moon.
In conclusion, the behavioral effects of artificial light to birds is poorly understood but it
seems that same general principles can be applied to bird-friendly lighting as to other
outdoor lighting excluding the specific information on spectral dependency. Shielded
streetlights should be used, and floodlights on the ground that point upward to illuminate
buildings, bridges, and monuments should be avoided. If such lighting designs must be
used, then they should be turned off during migration seasons when weather conditions
(such as misty nights with a low overcast ceiling) could contribute to attraction and
mortality. For example, The Fatal Light Awareness Program [193] has developed a Bird-
Friendly Building Program, aimed at building managers and owners, which has been
effective in reducing bird mortality. Also, the recent evidence points out that by changing
red warning lights to white strobes on broadcast towers may reduce the mortality of
migrating birds [49,193]. However, this poses an additional problem to the people living
next to those towers as people can find white flashing lights very disturbing. Like all fields
related to the ecological effects of light pollution, the interconnection between birds and
artificial light needs further research.
In addition to the ecological consequences of artificial light to migrating birds, marine and
grassland birds have been also investigates. In general ocean environments tend to have
less artificial lighting than terrestrial environments, and much of the artificial lighting on
the ocean occurs at intense source points possibly attracting marine birds from very large
catchment areas [205,206]. The main sources of artificial light in marine environments
include vessels, lighthouses, light-induced fisheries, and oil and gas platforms. Many
fisheries also use intense artificial lighting to attract, concentrate and facilitate prey capture
[207]. It has been estimated that 63-89% of the world catch of squid is caught using light
that can be mapped using satellite imagery [205]. Small vessels fishing squid often use a
single light, whereas large vessel may use 150 lamps, with about 300 kW of electric power
used for them [205].
Like migration birds, marine birds seem to be the most attracted to light during low cloud
cover and overcast skies, especially foggy, drizzly conditions that are pervasive in many
ocean regions [208]. Similarly to migration birds, the attraction to artificial light is
significantly smaller on bright, clear night with a full moon [202,203,209]. Many nocturnal
seabirds have a preponderance of rods in their retinas, more rhodopsin, and often larger
eyes than related diurnal species [210], possibly making nocturnal seabirds more
susceptible to the effects of artificial light. At least 21 species of procellariiform seabirds
(large long-winged bird with hooked bill and tubular nostrils that wanders the open seas,
e.g. albatross) are known to be attracted to artificial lighting [211]. Vulnerability to
artificial light seems to be greatest among those birds that feed on bioluminescent prey,
including even some of the largest of marine birds such as king penguins [212]. This area
requires also further research to understand the mortality and ecological consequences of
lighted structures at night to marine birds [213].
6.2.2 Rept iles
Reptiles are tetrapods (e.g. lizards) and amniotes (subgroup of tetrapod vertebrates),
animals whose embryos are surrounded by an amniotic membrane, and members of the
class Sauropsida. Artificial night lighting is a well-documented cause of mortality among
hatchling sea turtles, first described in detail by McFarlane in 1963 [214]. Since then
several reviews have described the impact of artificial night lighting to sea turtles
[215,216], and in this chapter only the key points of those reviews are discussed. Sea turtles
normally nest on remote beaches in darkness. Artificial night lighting disrupts the normal
behavior of sea turtle females searching for appropriate nest sites and of hatchlings
attempting to orient toward the ocean (orientation behavior known as seafinding [217]).
These adverse effects of lights on sea turtles in coastal environments have been
traditionally tried to reduce by streetlight filters on existing or new lamps and
nontraditional lights embedded in roadways instead of mounted on light poles. Turtles are
strongly attracted to the shorter, violet to green wavelengths but are either indifferent or
repelled by longer wavelengths depending on the species [217,218]. However, a study by
Tuxbury (2001) revealed [218] that filtered lighting also attracted the turtles, and the
attraction could be reversed by a stronger natural cue, a high silhouette namely resulting in
seaward orientation. Also the response to identical silhouette differed in two different turtle
species due to differences in spectral sensitivity of light. Another study by Nelson (2002)
[219] showed that filtering a high-pressure sodium (HPS) lamp does make its light less
attractive to the turtles. They also showed that the attraction depends on the intensity of the
light as well.
In Boca Raton, Florida, USA, street lighting on poles was
replaced by an embedded lighting by LEDs to the street
surface along a 1 km section of coastal roadway (Figure 35)
[220]. It was noticed in the experiment that the orientation
was disrupted when the streetlights were turned on but not
when the embedded lights were on or when both the
streetlights and embedded lights were switched off.
Additionally pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists all
responded favorably to the lighting modification.
As disruption of hatchling orientation is especially common
at coastal roadway sites in Florida, a working group
consisting of representatives from industry, state and federal
government, and technical experts formulated a Coastal
Roadway Lighting Manual to meet this problem [221].
Basically the manual involves three elements: keeping light
off the beach by repositioning or shielding the light; reduce
luminance by turning lights off, installing fewer lights, or
lowering wattage; and minimize the disruptive wavelengths
by using light filters or low pressure sodium luminaires. The manual also emphasizes the
importance of incorporating new technology as it becomes available. In conclusion, the
impacts of artificial night lighting to sea turtles are relatively well known compared to the
(A)
(B)
Figure 35. (A) Illustration of a
Smartstud pavement marker. (B)
Photo of the roadway after
lighting system revisions [220].
other fields of ecological light pollution. However, the solution to the problems caused by
artificial lighting does not seem to be that easy. For example in Florida, the near-coastal
approach involving the replacement of lamps will reduce the lighting directly visible from
the beach but will not reduce inland sources that produce ever-increasing sky glow.
In addition to problems experienced by sea turtles, it has been estimated that reptile species
(also known as herpetofauna) are disappearing at a rate that is at least comparable to that of
amphibians [222], yet little is being paid attention to this. With reptiles, the term night
light has been also used in different context which should not be confused with nocturnal
light pollution. Night-lighting is a common technique used to search at night for taxa that
possess a reflective layer called the tapetum lucidum in their retinas, which causes light
from searchers to be reflected, allowing target animals such as crocodiles to be located
[223].
A light trap is one of the most common tools used by entomologists to sample nocturnal
invertebrates, many of which are strongly attracted by artificial light over various
wavelengths [224,225]. Many reptile species, primarily geckos, have taken advantage of
this and some geckos are locally very common around houses [226]. There is also a single
published report of a nocturnal snake, the African brown house-snake, foraging under lights
and capturing a gecko [227]. A survey done by Henderson et al. (2001) [228] on the
responses of West Indian reptiles to human presence revealed that nine species of diurnal
lizard (from surveyed 69 species) and one species of diurnal snake (from 18 surveyed
species) extended their activity into the night near artificial lights. These results with a
recent report on diurnal snake lying in ambush for diurnal lizards at night lights [229],
suggest that artificial light may allow whole feeding webs to extend their activity times.
Exposure to different artificial lighting regimes under laboratory conditions is commonly
used to study behavior and physiology in (primarily diurnal) reptiles [230]. Such studies
have shown that a lighting regime can affect, for example, the interaction between
temperature and hormone levels [231] and response to externally administered hormones
[232], like in humans as later seen. However, practically no research has been done to study
the effects of artificial lights to free-ranging individuals. The example of geckos show
suggest that some species can take advantage of extended photoperiod possibly without
negative effects, but the information is not there for the possible negative effects on reptiles
[49]. Further research is especially needed to study the effects of diffuse illumination for
reptiles in urban and suburban contexts, and to what extent do artificial lights increase the
ability of introduced species to establish and become invasive. There has been a recent
increased interest in urban ecology (e.g. Pickett et al. 2001 [233]), and it can be hoped that
ecological consequences of artificial night lighting would receive more attention also.
6.2.3 Amphibians
Anuran amphibians (frogs and toads) are experiencing global declines in population size
and diversity [234,235]. Although anecdotal reports on the effects of artificial lights are
common in literature on frog natural history (e.g. Goin (1958) [236]; Long (1901) [237],
Figure 36), there have been few direct experimental studies of the effects of artificial night
lighting on anurans. As most foraging in frogs is visually mediated, artificial night lighting
can have a significant impact on the behavior of frogs. The studied species of frogs
maximize the capture of light necessary to form visual images at low illuminations by
having large retinal surfaces with more photoreceptors and through spatial summation, with
multiple photoreceptors simulating a single neuron, and/or temporal summation, with
photoreceptors collecting multiple photons before stimulating a neuron [238].For example,
squirrel tree frogs (Hyla squirella) have excellent low-illumination visual capabilities, some
individuals attempting to capture prey using vision alone at illuminations as low as 10
-5
lx
[239].
Anurans are thought to have a color vision [240], although it is not known whether color
vision functions at low nocturnal illuminations.
Most frogs studied have trichromatic color vision
[241,242] like in humans, and possibly
tetrachromatic color vision with sensitivity in the
ultraviolet wavelengths [243]. Frogs typically
exhibit strong blue preference and Muntz (1962)
[241] suggested that the preference of frogs to move
toward blue light (less than 500 nm) is an adaptive
response that causes semiaquatic frogs to jump
toward the pond rather than toward the shore when
they detect a predator. A few species tested by
Hailman and Jaeger (1974) exhibited a U-shaped
spectral response curve (preferring light less than
475 nm and greater than 600 nm) [240], suggesting
that frogs are more drawn (positive phototaxis) to
violet or red light [244]. It also seems that the light
intensity determines the spectral preferences of the
frog [245]. Dark-adapted frogs at low illuminations
are more likely to be attracted to blue light and to
light of longer wavelengths (yellow, orange, and
red), whereas those same frogs are likely to be
attracted to green and or violet wavelengths at
slightly higher illuminations.
It has been noticed that frogs tend to aggregate under streetlights, where they presumably
capture insects attracted to lights [228,246]. If frogs consistently move toward permanent
light sources, and away from natural habitats concentrating in areas around lights, this
being a classic example of an evolutionary trap [247]. Also, the slight increases in
illumination caused by nearby lights, bright distant lights, or sky glow may be sufficient to
allow foraging by frogs at times when visually mediated foraging would not normally be
possible. Artificial lighting also can alter the mate choice behavior as female Tngara frogs
(Physalaemus pustulosus) were more likely to choose mates and be more discriminating of
mates under darker conditions than under brighter conditions [248]. The possible reason for
this behavior could have been the greater perceived threat to predation being more visible
to visually oriented predators.
Little is known about the possible disruptive effects of artificial lighting to frog circadian
rhythms. Early study by Higginbotham (1939) [249] studied circadian rhythms in Bufo
Americanus and Bufo fowleri and found wide variation in individual responses to
illumination, whereas constant illumination was only minimally disruptive to normal
activity patterns. Melatonin hormone has been implicated in the control of variety of
processes in frogs [250], including color change, gonadal development, and reproduction
[251-253]. Even one minute of exposure to light during scotophase (the dark segment of a
light-dark cycle) can disrupt melatonin production, although the light intensity required for
this is not quantitatively known [254]. However, this disruption in melatonin production is
likely to have a variety of serious physiological consequences [250].
Figure 36. Attraction of frogs to a candle set
out on a small raft. Illustration by Charles
Copeland of an experiment in northern Maine
or Canada described by William J Long (1901)
[237]. Twelve or fifteen bullfrogs (Rana
catesbeiana) climbed on to the small raft before
it flipped over [44].
When illumination changes over brief periods of time, frogs have to adapt to the changes
(dark or light adaptation [255]) or suffer reduced visual capabilities. When dark-adapted
eyes are suddenly exposed to a bright light, the excessive amount of light entering the eye
causes excess photopigment to be bleached (i.e. chemically altered by light). Bleached
photopigments cannot respond to light again until their original chemical structure is
restored. In dark-adapted nocturnal frogs, returning the eyes to a dark-adapted state after
photopigment bleaching caused by a brief, bright flash of light can require hours,
depending on the light intensity, ambient illumination and the prestimulus adaptational
state of the eye [256]. Green rods, red rods, and cones all adapt differently to changes in
illumination [257,258] suggesting that color vision and monochromatic low-illumination
vision may recover differently after photopigment bleaching. Frogs living along roadways
or waterways with substantial traffic and frequent rapid shifts in illumination and resultant
bleaching may never achieve optimal dark adaptation [259]. Such frogs would have
difficulty capturing fast-moving prey or prey with low contrast relative to the background.
Even though a great deal of literature point out that artificial night lighting is capable of
affecting the biology of anuran amphibians, much more research is needed before more
detailed predictions can be made about the effects of artificial night lighting on particular
anuran species. Many of the effects can be complex and not easily predictable. Changes in
lighting may cause a cascade of effects in natural communities affecting for example
protective vegetation, availability of food (killed insets by streetlights). The obvious
method to reduce the artificial night lighting to natural habitats of frogs is to use lamps only
when needed (i.e. using motion detectors, switching lamps off after use), the use of full
cutoff luminaires, and to reduce the amount of light that lamps produce. Another
management option is to block light from entering amphibian habitats using for example
thick hedges of native plants between illuminated areas and critical anuran habitat.
Changing or narrowing spectral output of lamps is not likely to help the problem of
artificial night lighting as frogs and toads possess color vision and are affected differently
by different wavelengths of light. Both the direct and indirect effects of artificial night
lighting require further research to improve lighting management near anuran habitats [49].
Another major group of amphibians, salamanders are particularly sensitive to
environmental perturbations and are suffering global population declines [234].
Salamanders, perhaps are even more sensitive to environmental changes than anurans, and
therefore can serve as important indicators of the health of some ecosystems [260,261].
Based on few studies on nocturnally active salamanders it seems that most of them are
probably negatively phototactic (movement away from light) [262]. At least some
salamanders have color vision (e.g., Salamandra salamandra [263]) such that the
wavelength of ambient light may influence phototactic responses. However, it is not know
whether the negative phototaxis is due to an avoidance of light or an avoidance of harmful
temperature and moisture levels that are more likely to occur in lighted areas than in
unlighted areas [264,265].
Study by Placyk and Graves (2001) [266] compared the difference of 15-minute treatment
of bright light (100 W incandescent light bulb), dim light (7 W incandescent light bulb),
and ultraviolet black light (4-400nm) on foraging behavior of salamanders. The
salamanders ate significantly less prey in the bright light treatment as well as had an
increased activity, possibly because salamanders were actively searching for refugia under
bright light. It seems that high nocturnal illumination negatively affects foraging behavior,
whereas less extreme illuminations enhance visually guided foraging while the quantitative
limits are not known. The spectral dependency of photic responses (such as phototaxis,
activity, orientation and navigation) may change from larval (the newly hatched, earliest
stage of any of various animals that undergo metamorphosis, differing markedly in form
and appearance from the adult) to adult stages or from terrestrial to aquatic stages.
Additionally, salamanders use extraocular photoreceptors probably located in the pineal
organ [267] with a spectral sensitivity similar to or different from that expressed in the eye.
For example, compass and home orientation seems to be disturbed by monochromatic,
long-wavelength light [268]. And like in frogs, the production of melatonin hormone is
modulated by photoperiod in salamanders [250,269,270]. Like with anuran amphibians, the
long-term studies of the effects of artificial night lighting to salamander physiology
(endocrine function, foraging behavior, territoriality, and activity patterns) are highly
needed. It can be intuitively assumed that less artificial light at night is always better than
more.
6.2.4 Fishes
The recent increase in the use of artificial light by humans has also subjected many aquatic
habitats to unnatural cycles of illumination. More than half of the worlds human
population lives within 100 km of an ocean, and most other major human developments are
near rivers or lakes [271]. Permanent lights are also found at fish farms in nearshore zones,
cruise ships, and marine oil platforms. Fishing boats operate all night, some using high-
intensity lights to attract their catch. The effects of light on the behavior of aquatic
organisms are relatively well known [272], but little research has been devoted to
consequences of human disruption of diel (a 24-hour cycle, as opposed to diurnal (day) or
nocturnal (night) occurrences), lunar, and seasonal cycles of illumination [273]. Aquatic
biota have evolutionarily adapted to normal ambient nighttime light regime by the effects
of moonlight, starlight, cloud cover, and bioluminescence [274], whereas light pollution has
modified the intensity, spectra, frequency, and duration of nighttime light reaching and
penetrating water surfaces.
Teleosts represent 96% of all living fishes and constitute the bulk of the worlds major
fisheries, including herring, smelt, salmon, tuna, cod, trout, halibut, lingcod, flounder,
catfish, and other commercially important species [275]. For teleosts, important behaviors
such as feeding, schooling (a school of fish is a group that swims in a synchronized
manner, with similar speeds and direction), and migration depend on specific light
intensities. The teleosts eye consists of cones and rods of which cones respond to high light
intensities and rods to low light intensities like in humans. Fish schools disband and cease
feeding by visual means when the light drops below the rod threshold [276]. Differences in
the capacity of visual pigments to absorb light are determined by genetics and habitat, and
this capacity changes with the light spectrum available in the species habitats [277]. For
example, as juvenile salmonids move from fresh to salt water, their pigments change from
porphyropsin- to rhodopsin-dominated [278]. Although the behavioral changes induced by
light are consistent with the documented studies in both marine and freshwater habitats
[279-283].
Responses of fish to light can be divided into the reaction to luminance [cd/m
2
] and the
reaction to illuminance [lx]. The basic responses vary, even within species, depending on
many factors including characteristics of fish [284], ambient condition (light/dark
adaptation) [285], and characteristics of life (e.g. duration, intensity and spectrum) [286]. In
regard to light duration for example, unlike the normal flickering light caused by wave,
cloud, and sun conditions underwater, the discharge of strobe light is apparently disturbing
to fishes [287]. Fish may be exposed to strobe lights at dams, power-generating stations,
locks, and by vehicle headlights illuminating a shoreline. Strobe lights can be also used to
reduce entrainment of salmonids into passages where they could be harmed [288].
Typically researchers have used mercury vapor lights, which have more energy in the blue
and ultraviolet spectrum, to attract fish. One study by Puckett et al. (1987) [289] found that
the fish first avoided the mercury vapor light but then swim toward the light after the
adaptation. Another study by Nemeth et al. (1992) [290] found greater fish activity and
fewer avoidance reactions to mercury vapor lights than to strobe lights. In general, as said,
further research is needed to understand better the responses of fish to changes in
photoperiod by artificial night lighting.
6.2.5 Invert ebr at es
Insects are critically important as pollinators and members of terrestrial food webs, the
possible adverse effects of street lighting on insects theoretically could have serious
ecological consequences [49]. Several researches have examined the possible adverse
effects of artificial lighting to insects in general [291,292], moths [293-297], and fireflies
[298,299] specifically, but the area still needs further research. Light trap sampling
provides a semiquantitative method for studying responses of insects to artificial light
[291]. The efficiency of light traps has been studies in relation to moonlight intensity and
phase [300], moonlight polarization [301], and other environmental factors [302,303].
The approaching behavior of insects to lamps can be distinguished as near and far
effects [300]. Most studies have focused on near effects, within the zone of attraction,
whereas far effects are derived from a changing background illumination by the moon or
other light sources. Insect behavior in the near zone can be further categorized to: 1)
fixation or captivity effect, 2) crash barrier effect, and 3) vacuum cleaner effect.
The fixation effect means that insects are not able to escape from the near zone of
lighting, the crash barrier effect means that there are interruptions of movement across
landscape due to artificial light sources, the vacuum cleaner effect then means the
suction of non-moving insects to (either foraging or migrating) to their deaths (e.g. by
illuminated greenhouse [303]). It is thought that the magnitude of these effects depends on
the background illumination, in other words during full moon the effects of artificial light
sources are weaker [49]. However, it could be also that some insects show a trimodal flight
periodicity during the lunar month, with peaks before and after the new moon and at the
full moon [304].
Eisenbeis et al. [49,305] studied the differences in insect attraction depending on the lamp
type. High pressure mercury vapor, high-pressure sodium-xenon vapor, high pressure
sodium vapor, and high pressure mercury vapor lamps with UV filters were used in the
study. High pressure mercury vapor lamp was noticed to catch the most insects, while the
high pressure sodium only caught 45% of the insects caught by high pressure mercury. The
UV filtered high pressure sodium caught only 11% of the insects caught by high pressure
mercury demonstrating the significance of the UV radiation. This was somewhat consistent
with the results obtained by Bauer (1993) [306] with similar lamp types, by Schanowski
and Spth (1994) [307] with low pressure sodium lamps, and Klyuchko (1957) [308] when
comparing an incandescent lamp with a mercury vapor lamp. These results of the light
quality affecting flight-to-light behavior of insects were backed up also by the studies of
Scheibe [309].
Even though the light traps allow the capture of death insects, the exact quantification of
the killed insects (or those that have become inactive, e.g. failing to reproduce) is
problematic. For example similar difficulties exist in measuring the destruction of insects to
windshields of vehicles. Gepp (1973) [310] had attempted to calculate the number of
insects killed in traffic each year in Austria and came up with an estimate of billions (116
insects/km for the front of a car). Bauer (1993) [306] estimated that one of three insects
approaching a streetlamp is captured by the trap, and Kolligs (2000) [303] came up with a
figure of 30-40%.
6.3 Human physiology
Despite of the availability of electric light over a century the possible adverse effects of
artificial lighting are only partially understood [311]. Recent research concentrating on the
link between light and cancer [312] have shown that light and especially night lighting can
be a public health issue as reviewed by Pauley (2004) [313]. Industrialized countries show
five-fold or higher risk of breast cancer than the least industrialized countries [314].
However, in contrary to well-established link of lung cancer and smoking [315], there
seems to be no well-established risk factors for the rise of breast cancer risk in
industrialized countries [316,317]. There is increasing support for the idea that circadian
disruption from aspects of modern life, especially electric lighting, is a factor in the
population burden of breast cancer [318-323]. Studies of shift workers have reported
elevated risk of breast cancer [324-328], and studies in blind women [329-332] have
reported reduced risk of breast cancer.
As said the majority of recent research has focused on the role of excess light during
nighttime rather than the absence of darkness during night, in this chapter the importance of
darkness during human biological night is reviewed. Little research has been done on how
people perceive unwanted artificial lighting from outdoors during night. Forejt et al. (2004)
[79] did a query among a Czech population and found out that 5% of the population
perceives unwanted artificial light from outdoors as one of the two main causes of their
sleep problems. Further 7% complained about light amounts which were not attenuated to
tolerable levels, and further 20% attenuated light pollution of their bedrooms to dark levels
perceived as sufficient. However, 5 % of Czech population felt unhappy to miss the full
natural morning light due to barriers against artificial night lighting. The authors [79]
suggest a threshold light level (face illuminance) below one millilux, being the level
adopted by people during their evolution. However no further justification for this claim is
given.
Most of the studies concerning the role of darkness in human physiology has been made on
shift workers. As it is not really known how much of the noticed improvement in shift-
work studies in regard circadian maladaptation [333-338] is due to the bright light during
work and how much is due to the scheduled daytime sleep in darkness [339]. Several
mechanisms can exist for this adaptation mechanism, the sleep itself may function as a
behavioral nonphotic synchronizer [340,341]; or the darkness may act as a synchronizer in
its own right (a dark pulse) [342,343]. It could be possible that the powerful phase-
shifting effect observed [333] might have been due entirely to fixing the treatment subjects
sleep schedules, with bright light playing only a minor role [344]. In conclusion, further
research should be also directed to the study of the effects of dark periods in addition to
cancer/light-interaction which is receiving at the moment a lot of attention from the
research community.
Conclusions 55
7 CONCLUSIONS
The understanding of the ecological effects is only partially understood at the moment, and
the field of light pollution needs urgently further research. There should be clearly
multidisciplinary collaboration between physical scientists, engineers, medical experts,
biologists, and ecologists. In regard to environmental aspects, especially the measurement
of light characteristics and the understanding of tropic and aquatic ecosystems need further
research [44]. In regard to human physiology the research is rather active on the possible
carcinogenic effect of artificial night lighting, but the knowledge on the influence of dark
periods or dark pulses on human physiology is rather unknown. Some research is devoted
on dark periods in the studies on shift-work and lighting regimes, but a lot more research is
still needed.
References 56
8 REFERENCES
1 Purves D, Fitzpatrick D, Augustine GJ, Katz LC, Lawrence C, LaMantia AS, McNamara JO, Mark WS.
2001. Neuroscience. 2nd edition. Sunderland. Sinauer Associates, Inc.
2 Berson, DM, Dunn FA, Takao M. 2002. Phototransduction by retinal ganglion cells that set the
circadian clock. Science 295:10.
3 Stockman A, Sharpe LT. 2000. Spectral sensitivities of the middle- and long-wavelength-sensitive cones
derived from measurements of observers of known genotype. Vision Res. 40:1711-1737. The photopic
sensitivity data, together with the standard CIE scotopic data. Available from: http://cvision.ucsd.edu/
[2006 December 14].
4 Kokoschka S. 1997. Das V()- Dilemma in der Photometrie. Proceedings of 3. Internationales Forum fur
den lichttechnischen Nachswuchs, TU Ilmenau, Ilmenau.
5 Eloholma M, Ketomki J, Halonen L. 2004. Luminances and visibility in road lighting - conditions,
measurements and analysis. Report 30. Helsinki University of Technology, Lighting Laboratory. 27 p.
6 Provencio I, Rodriguez IR, Jiang G, Hayes WP, Moreira RF, Rollag MD. 2000. A novel human opsin in
the inner retina. J. Neurosci. 20:600605.
7 Provencio I, Jiang Gm De Grip WJ, Hayes WP, Rollag MD. 1998. Melanopsin: An opsin in
melanophores, brain, and eye. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 95:340345.
8 Dacey DM, Liao HW, Peterson BB, Robinson FR, Smith VC, Pokorny J, Yau KW, Gamlin PD. 2005.
Melanopsin-expressing ganglion cells in primate retina signal colour and irradiance and project to the
LGN. Nature 433:749-754.
9 Rea MS, Figueiro MG, Bullough JD, Bierman A. 2005. A model of phototransduction by the human
circadian system. Brain Res Brain Res Rev. 50(2):213-228.
10 Mnch, M., Kobialka, S., Steiner, R., Oelhafen, P., Wirz-Justice, A., Cajochen, C., 2005. Wavelength-
dependent Effects of Evening Light Exposure on Sleep Architecture and Sleep EEG Power Density in
Men. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 290, R1421-R1428.
11 Cajochen, C., Mnch, M., Kobialka, S., Kruchi, K., Steiner, R., Oelhafen, P., Orgl, S., Wirz-Justice,
A., 2005. High sensitivity of human melatonin, alertness, thermoregulation, and heart rate to short
wavelength light. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 90, 1311-1316.
12 Lockley, S.W., Evans, E.E., Scheer, F.A., Brainard, G.C., Czeisler, C.A., Aeschbach, D., 2006. Short-
wavelength sensitivity for the direct effects of light on alertness, vigilance, and the waking
electroencephalogram in humans. Sleep. 29(2), 161-168.
13 Revell, V.L., Arendt, J., Fogg, L.F., Skene, D.J., 2006. Alerting effects of light are sensitive to very short
wavelengths. Neurosci Lett. 399(1-2), 96-100.
14 Thapan K, Arendt J, Skene DJ. 2001. An action spectrum for melatonin suppression: evidence for a
novel non-rod, non-cone photoreceptor system in humans. J. Physiol. 535(1):261267.
15 Brainard GC, Hanifin JP, Greeson JM, Byrne B, Glickman G, Gerner E, Rollag MD. 2001. Action
spectrum for melatonin regulation in humans: evidence for a novel circadian photoreceptor. J. Neurosci.
21:6405-6412.
16 Schlyter P. Online article. Available from: http://www.stjarnhimlen.se/comp/radfaq.html [2007 January
29].
17 Anon. UBV System. Available online: http://www.answers.com/UBV%20system [2007 June 17].
18 Anon. Wikipedia. Luminous intensiity. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_intensity
[2006 December 14].
19 Anon. Wikipedia. Luminous flux. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_flux [2006
December 14].
References 57
20 Sprawls P. Radiation Quantities and Units. Available from: http://www.sprawls.org/ppmi2/RADQU/
[2006 December 14].
21 Anon. Wikipedia. Luminous efficacy. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_efficacy
[2006 December 14].
22 Halonen L, Lehtovaara J. 1992. Valaistustekniikka [In finnish: Illumination engineering]. Otatieto,
Espoo, Finland.
23 Palmer JM. 1999. Radiometry and photometry FAQ. Available from:
http://www.optics.arizona.edu/Palmer/rpfaq/rpfaq.htm [2007 January 31].
24 Anon. Federal Standard 1037C. Available from: http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/fs-1037c.htm [2007
February 01].
25 Anon. A Nickel's Worth of Radiation. Available from: http://hyperphysics.phy-
astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/nickel.html [2007 February 01].
26 Anon. Wikipedia. Lambert's cosine law. Available from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambert's_cosine_law [2007 February 01].
27 Barnes C, Tibbitts T, Sager J, Deitzer G, Bubenheim D, Koerner G, Bugbee B. 1993. Accuracy of
quantum sensors measuring yield photon flux and photosynthetic photon flux. HortScience. 28(12):
1197-1200.
28 Anon. Wikipedia. Apparent magnitude. Available from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_magnitude [2007 February 01].
29 Anon. Wikipedia. Absolute magnitude. Available from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_magnitude [2007 February 01].
30 Anon. Outdoor Lighting Code Handbook. Available from: http://www.darksky.org/handbook/lc-hb-v1-
14.html#lamptypes [2007 January 31].
31 Anon. Philips. Lighting - Product Catalogue. Lamps & Gear. Available from:
http://www.prismaecat.lighting.philips.com/LightSite/Whirlwind.aspx?eca=LEPPLG&cpf=GBEPEN&tr
ee=0&scr_md=1111# [2007 January 31].
32 Anon. Royal Astronomical Society of Canada. Light Pollution Abatement Site. Availble online:
http://calgary.rasc.ca/lp/definitions.html [2007 June 16].
33 Anon. Helsinki University of Technology (TKK). Lighting Laboratory. S-118.2101 Valaistustekniikka ja
shkturvallisuus [In Finnish: Illumination engineering and electrical safety]. Course material. Not
available online.
34 Anon. What are the IESNA cutoff classifications? Available from:
http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/NLPIP/lightinganswers/lightpollution/cutoffClassifications.asp [2007
June 17]
35 Anon. National Lighting Product Information Program (NLPIP). Light Pollution Q & A. Online article.
Available from: http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/nlpip/lightinganswers/lightpollution/abstract.asp [2007
January 31].
36 Isobe S, Hamamura S. 2000. Light pollution and its energy loss. Astrophysics and Space Science
273(1):289-294.
37 City of Helsinki. 2003. Kaupungin valot: Helsingin valaistuksen kaupunkikuvalliset periaatteet [In
Finnish: City Lights: Urban principles of the lighting of Helsinki]. Helsinki: City of Helsinki. Available
from: http://www.rakvv.hel.fi/images/kaupungin%20valot.pdf [2006 November 30].
38 Schwartz HE. 2003. Light Pollution Control: World-Wide Effects of and Efforts to Reduce Light
Pollution. In a publication: Heck A. (ed.). Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy, Vol 4. Kluwer
Academic Publishers. Pp. 37-57.
39 Philips. 2005. Philips highlights the massive financial & environmental potential of new energy and CO2
saving lighting technologies. Press release. Available from:
References 58
http://www.lighting.philips.com/gl_en/news/press/product_innovations/archive_2005/financial_environ
mental.php?main=global&parent=4390&id=gl_en_news&lang=en [2006 November 30].
40 Elvidge CD, Imhoff ML, Baugh KE, et al. 2001. Nighttime lights of the world: 199495. ISPRS J
Photogramm Rem S 56:8199.
41 Hollan J. Why the sky over your town and even far from it glows so much? Available from:
http://amper.ped.muni.cz/light/drafts/graphics/ [2006 December 13].
42 Bortle JE. The Bortle Dark-Sky Scale. Online article. Available from:
http://skytonight.com/resources/darksky/3304011.html?page=1&c=y [2006 December 31].
43 Anon. 1997. CIE Technical Report: Guidelines for Minimizing Sky Glow, CIE 126-1997. Commission
Internationale de l'Eclairage.
44 Longcore T, Rich C. 2004. Ecological light pollution. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment
2(4):191198.
45 Verheijen FJ. 1985. Photopollution: artificial light optic spatial control systems fail to cope with.
Incidents, causations, remedies. Exp Biol 44:118.
46 Schmiedel J. 2001. Auswirkungen knstlicher Beleuchtung auf die Tierwelt ein berblick [Effects of
artificial lighting on the animal world an overview]. Schriftenreihe Landschaftspflege und Naturschutz
67:1951.
47 Outen AR. 2002. The ecological effects of road lighting. In: Sherwood B, Culter D, and Burton JA (Eds).
Wildlife and roads: the ecological impact. London, UK: Imperial College Press.
48 Hill D. 1990. The impact of noise and artificial light on waterfowl behaviour: a review and synthesis of
the available literature. Norfolk, United Kingdom: British Trust for Ornithology Report No. 61.
49 Rich C, Longcore T. 2005. Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting. Island Press,
Washington DC, USA.
50 Gal G, Loew ER, Rudstam LG, Mohammadian AM. 1999. Light and diel vertical migration: spectral
sensitivity and light avoidance by Mysis relicta. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 56: 311322.
51 Rydell J. 1992. Exploitation of insects around streetlamps by bats in Sweden. Funct Ecol 6:744750.
52 Anon. IDA - International Dark-Sky Association. International outdoor lighting regulations. Available
from: http://www.darksky.org/ordsregs/intlregs [2006 December 13].
53 Anon. AS 4282-1997: Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting. Abstract available from:
http://www.saiglobal.com/shop/script/Details.asp?DocN=stds000017299 [2006 December 13].
54 Anon. The Town of Missippi Mills, Ontario, Canada. Light Pollution By-Law. Available from:
http://www.mississippimills.ca/localgovt/Planning/Bylaw%2003-62%20Illumination-Lighting.pdf [2006
December 13].
55 Anon. D.S. N 686/98 Norma de emisin para la regulacin de la contaminacin lumnica. Available
from: http://www.conama.cl/portal/1255/article-26083.html [2006 December 13].
56 Anon. CONAMA, Comisin Nacional del Medio Ambiente - Presentacin contaminacin lumnica [In
Spanish: National Commission of Environment - Presentation of Light Pollution]. Available from:
http://www.conama.cl/portal/1255/article-27127.html [2006 December 13].
57 Anon. The Czech law on Protection of the Air, including Light Pollution prevention. Available from:
http://www.astro.cz/darksky/czairlaw2.htm [2006 December 13].
58 Anon. The Clean Air at Night as well -- a template for amending Clean Air Acts in the European Union
and all over the world. Available from: http://www.astro.cz/darksky/eu_law/ [2006 Decembe 13].
59 Anon. 2003. CIE: Publication No. 150 - Guide on the limitation of the effects of obtrusive light from
outdoor lighting installations
60 YSL. 2000. Ympristnsuojelulaki 4.2.2000/86 [In Finnish: Environmental Protection law]. Available
from: http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/2000/20000086 [2006 November 30].
References 59
61 Cinzano P. Laws against light pollution in Italy. Available from:
http://www.lightpollution.it/cinzano/en/page95en.html [2006 December 13].
62 Anon. Golden Bay (NZ) Outdoor Lighting Control Ordinance. Available from:
http://www.darksky.org/resources/information-sheets/is036 [2006 December 13].
63 Anon. Comunidad Autnoma de Canarias (Canary Islands) - Oficina Tecnica para la Proteccion de la
Calidad del Cielo [In Spanish: Technical Office for protection of the quality of the sky]. Available from:
http://www.iac.es/proyect/otpc/eng.htm [2006 December 13]
64 Anon. Pilot programme on the evaluation and reduction of light pollution in Catalunya. Available from:
http://www.am.ub.es/contaminacio-luminica/plapilot_eng.html [2006 December 13].
65 Anon. Ley de ordenacin ambiental de la iluminacin exterior para la proteccin del medio nocturno [in
Spanish: Law on regulating ambient lighting for the protection of night environment]. Available from:
http://www.am.ub.es/contaminacio-luminica/fitxers/luminicacast.doc [2006 December 13].
66 Anon. Parque Natural de lAlbufera [in Spanish: Albufera Natural Park]. Available from:
http://www.albufera.com/ [2006 December 13].
67 Anon. Ecolight Project. Available from: http://www.ecollum.org/ingles/1.htm [2006 December 13].
68 Anon. Somerset County (United Kingdom), Local Agenda 21, Noise and Light Pollution. Available
from: http://www.somerset.gov.uk/somerset/council/cpa/cpa2006/evidence/Documents/24.pdf [2006
December 13].
69 Anon. U.S.A. Municipality Outdoor Lighting Regulations (ODLRs) by State. Available from:
http://www.darksky.org/ordsregs/usamunis [2006 December 13].
70 Hollan J. 2004. Metabolism-influencing light: measurement by digital cameras. Poster at Cancer and
Rhythm, Oct 14-16, Graz, Austria, 2004. Available from:
http://amper.ped.muni.cz/noc/english/canc_rhythm/g_camer.pdf [03 November 2006].
71 Brainard GC, Hanifin JP, Greeson JM, Byrne B, Glickman G, Gerner E, Rollag MD. 2001. Action
spectrum for melatonin regulation in humans: evidence for a novel circadian photoreceptor. J. Neurosci.
21:6405-6412.
72 Purves D, Fitzpatrick D, Augustine GJ, Katz LC, Lawrence C, LaMantia AS, McNamara JO, Mark WS.
2001. Neuroscience. 2nd edition. Sunderland. Sinauer Associates, Inc.
73 Hankins MW, Lucas RJ. 2002. The primary visual pathway in humans is regulated according to long-
term light exposure through the action of a nonclassical photopigment. Curr Biol. 12:191-198.
74 Stockman A, Sharpe LT, Fach CC, 1999, The spectral sensitivity of the human short-wavelength cones.
Vision Research, 39, 2901-2927. The lens tranmissivity data can be downloaded at
http://cvision.ucsd.edu/ [03 November 2006].
75 Rea MS, Figueiro MG, Bullough JD, Bierman A. 2005. A model of phototransduction by the human
circadian system. Brain Res Brain Res Rev. 50(2):213-228.
76 Anon. Ecology of the Night Symposium. Scotobiology. Online article. Available from:
http://www.muskokaheritage.org/ecology-night/scotobiology.asp [2006 November 03].
77 Posch T, Hollan J, Kerschbaum F, Bleha M. 2004. Poster at Cancer and Rhythm, Oct 14-16, Graz,
Austria, 2004. Available from: [03 November 2006].
78 Lyytimki J. 2006. Unohdetut ympristongelmat [In Finnish: Forgotten environmental problems],
Gaudeamus, Helsinki, Finland.
79 Forejt M, Hollan J, Skocovsk, Skotnice R. 2004. Sleep disturbances by light at night: two queries made
in 2003 in Czechia. Poster at Cancer and Rhythm, Oct 14-16, Graz, Austria, 2004. Available from:
http://amper.ped.muni.cz/noc/english/canc_rhythm/g_sleep.pdf [03 November 2006].
80 Cinzano P. 2004, A portable spectrophotometer for light pollution measurements. Mem. Soc. Astron. It.,
Suppl., 5/2004, 395-398. Available from: http://sait.oat.ts.astro.it/MSAIS/5/PDF/395.pdf [31 December
2006].
References 60
81 Anon. Unihedron Sky Quality Meter (SQM). Available from: http://unihedron.com/projects/darksky/
[2006 December 31].
82 Anon. TAOSTSL237 Light-to-frequency (LTF) converter specifications. Available from:
http://www.taosinc.com/product_detail.asp?cateid=2&proid=52 [2006 December 31].
83 Anon. Hoya CM-500. Spectral response curves. Available from:
http://www.newportglass.com/hcm500.htm [2006 December 31].
84 Danko A. Clear Sky Clock. Available from: http://cleardarksky.com/csk/ [2006 December 31].
85 Cinzano P. 2005. Night sky photometry with Sky Quality Meter. Available from:
www.lightpollution.it/download/sqmreport.pdf [2006 December 13].
86 Garstang RH. 1986. Model for night-sky illumination. Astronomical Society of the Pacific 98:364-375.
87 Walker MF. 1973. Light Pollution in California and Arizona. Publications of the Astronomical Society
of the Pacific 85:508.
88
89 Bertiau FC, Graeve ED, Treanor PJ. 1973. The artificial night-sky illumination in Italy (Atmospheric
model of artificial night sky illumination in Italy). Vatican Observatory Publications 1(4):159.
90 Turnrose BE. 1974. Absolute Spectral Energy Distribution of the Night Sky at Palomar and Mount
Wilson Observatories. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 86:545.
91
92 Berry RL. 1976. Light Pollution in Southern Ontario. Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of
Canada 70:97.
93 Treanor PJ. 1973. A simple propagation law for artificial night-sky illumination. The Observatory
93:117-120.
94 Pike R. 1976. A simple computer model for the growth of light pollution. Journal of the Royal
Astronomical Society of Canada 70(3):116-126.
95 Walker MF. 1977. The effects of urban lighting on the brightness of the night sky. Publications of the
Astronomical Society of the Pacific 89:405.
96 Ketvirtis A. 1967. Highway Lighting Engineering (pp. 28). Foundation of Canada Engineering
Corporation, Toronto Canada,.
97 Goody RM. 1964. Atmospheric Radiation (pp. 414), Oxford, United Kingdom.
98 Allen CW. 1973. Astrophysical Quantities (pp. 122), 3
rd
Edition, Athlone Press, London, United
Kingdom.
99 Hollan J. 2004. Software to read photometric files (ies and eulumdat formats) concerning luminaires and
classify them to cutoff categories and ``Light Pollution Increments''. Available from:
http://amper.ped.muni.cz/light/ies2/ [2006 December 13].
100 Aub M, Franchomme-Foss L, Robert-Staehler P, Houle V. 2005. Light Pollution Modelling and
Detection in a Heterogeneous Environment: Toward a Night Time Aerosol Optical Depth Retrieval
Method. Proceedings of SPIE Volume 5890. Atmospheric and Environmental Remote Sensing Data
Processing and Utilization: Numerical Atmospheric Prediction and Environmental Monitoring, Hung
Lung A. Huang, Hal J. Bloom, Xiaofeng Xu, Gerald J. Dittberner, Editors, 589012 (Sep. 9, 2005).
101 Anon. 2005. SAND project web page available from: http://www.graphycs.qc.ca/SAND/sand.html [2006
December 25].
102 Anon. 2005. Mission intensive California-Arizona-Utah. Available from:
http://www.graphycs.qc.ca/SAND/missionca2005/index.html [2006 December 25].
References 61
103 Cinzano P. 2005. Roadpollution - Software for the analysis of road lighting installations and the
evaluation of the environmental impact due to light pollution. User Manual. Available from:
http://www.lightpollution.it/roadpollution/ [2006 December 13].
104 Kerola DX. 2006. Modelling artificial night-sky brightness with a polarized multiple scattering radiative
transfer computer code. Abstract. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 365(4):1295.
105 Anon. The Gauss-Seidel iterative method. Available from:
http://kr.cs.ait.ac.th/~radok/math/mat7/step13.htm [2007 June 17].
106 Cinzano P. 2006. Recent progresses on a second world atlas of the night-sky brightness - lptran/lpdart
realistic models, tomography of light pollution, accurate validation methods and extended satellite data
analysis. IAU Comm. 50 Working Group Light Pollution, XXVI IAU General Assembly, Praha 23
August 2006. Available from: http://www.inquinamentoluminoso.it/download/iau06cinzano.pdf [2006
December 13].
107 Anon. DIALux Manuals. English version. Available from:
http://www.dial.de/CMS/English/Articles/DIALux/Download/Handbuecher.html?ID=42 [2006
December 24].
108 Heo J, Lee C, Chakrabarty D, Paek K. 2002. Growth responses of marigold and salvia bedding plants as
affected by monochromic or mixture radiation provided by a Light-Emitting Diode (LED). Plant Growth
Regulation 38(3):225-230.
109 Jao RC, Fang W. 2003. An adjustable light source for photo-phyto related research and young plant
production. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 19(5):601-608.
110 Schubert FE, Kim JK. 2005. Solid-state light sources getting smart. Science 308(5726):1274-1278.
111 Pinho P, Tetri E, Halonen L. 2005. Design and performance assessments of solid state light sources for
plant growth. Lux Europa 2005 Lighting for humans - The 10th European Lighting Conference, Berlin,
Germany, September 19-21, 2005, Deutsche Lichttechnische Gesellschaft e.V. , pp. 297-301.
112 Whelan HT, Houle JM, Whelan NT, Donohoe DL, Cwiklinski J, Schmidt MH, Gould L, Larson DL,
Meyer GA, Cevenini V, Stinson H. 2000. The NASA light-emitting diode medical programprogress in
space flight and terrestrial applications. AIP Conference Proceedings - January 19, 2000 - Volume 504,
pp. 37-43. Space Technology and Application International Forum 2000.
113 Cathey HM, Campbell LE. 1975. Effectiveness of five vision-lighting sources on photo-regulation of 22
species of ornamental plants. Journal of the American Society of Horticultural Science 100:65-71.
114 Cathey HM, Campbell LE. 1975. Security lighting and its impact on the landscape. Journal of
Arboriculture 1:181-187.
115 Smith H. 1995. Physiological and Ecological Function within the Phytochrome Family. Annual Review
of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology 46:289-315.
116 Smith H. 2000. Phytochromes and light signal perception by plantsan emerging synthesis. Nature
407:585-591.
117 Huq E, Quail PH. 2005. Phytochrome [PQ1] signaling. Pp. 151-170 in Briggs WR, Spudich JL (eds.),
Handbook of photosensory receptors. Wiley-VCH Berlag, Weinheim, Germany.
118 Tu SL, Lagarias JC. 2005. The phytochromes. Pp. 121-149 in Briggs WR, Spudich JL (eds.), Handbook
of photosensory receptors. Wiley-VCH Berlag, Weinheim, Germany.
119 Batschauer A. 2005. Plant cryptochromes: their genes, biochemistry, and physiological roles. Pp. 211-
246 in Briggs WR, Spudich JL (eds.), Handbook of photosensory receptors. Wiley-VCH Berlag,
Weinheim, Germany.
120 Cashmore AR. 2005. Plant cryptochromes and signaling. Pp. 247-258 in Briggs WR, Spudich JL (eds.),
Handbook of photosensory receptors. Wiley-VCH Berlag, Weinheim, Germany.
121 Briggs WR, Christie JM. 2002. Phototropins 1 and 2: versatile plant blue-light receptors. Trends in Plant
Science 7(5):204-210.
References 62
122 Christie JM, Briggs WR. 2005.Blue light sensing and signaling by the phototropins. Pp. 277-303 in
Briggs WR, Spudich JL (eds.), Handbook of photosensory receptors. Wiley-VCH Berlag, Weinheim,
Germany.
123 Briggs WR, Huala E. 1999. Blue-light photoreceptors in higher plants. Annual Review of Cell and
Developmental Biology 15:33-62.
124 Imaizumi T, Tran HG, Swartz TE, Briggs WR, Kay SA. 2003. FKF1 is essential for photoperiodic-
specific light signalling in Arabidopsis. Nature 426(6964):302-306.
125 Borthwick HA, Hendricks SB, Parker MW, Toole EH, Toole VK. 1952. A Reversible Photoreaction
Controlling Seed Germination. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 38(8):662-666.
126 Hendricks SB, Borthwick HA. 1967. The function of phytochrome in regulation of plant growth. Proc
Natl Acad Sci U S A. 58(5):2125-2130.
127 Smith H. 1982. Light quality, photoperception and plant strategy. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 33:481518.
128 Lascve G, Leymarie J, Olney MA, Liscum E, Christie JM, Vavasseur A, Briggs WR. 1999. Arabidopsis
contains at least four independent blue-light-activated signal transduction pathways. Plant Physiol.
120(2):605-614.
129 Lin C, Yang H, Guo H, Mockler T, Chen J, Cashmore AR. 1998. Enhancement of blue-light sensitivity
of Arabidopsis seedlings by a blue light receptor cryptochrome 2. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 95(5):2686-
2690.
130 Ahmad M, Grancher N, Heil M, Black RC, Giovani B, Galland P, Lardemer D. 2002. Action spectrum
for cryptochrome-dependent hypocotyl growth inhibition in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 129(2):774-785.
131 Malhotra K, Kim ST, Batschauer A, Dawut L, Sancar A. 1995. Putative blue-light photoreceptors from
Arabidopsis thaliana and Sinapis alba with a high degree of sequence homology to DNA photolyase
contain the two photolyase cofactors but lack DNA repair activity. Biochemistry 34(20):6892-6899.
132 Kleine T, Lockhart P, Batschauer A. 2003. An Arabidopsis protein closely related to Synechocystis
cryptochrome is targeted to organelles. Plant J. 35(1):93-103.
133 Brudler R, Hitomi K, Daiyasu H, Toh H, Kucho K, Ishiura M, Kanehisa M, Roberts VA, Todo T, Tainer
JA, Getzoff ED. 2003. Identification of a new cryptochrome class. Structure, function, and evolution.
Mol Cell. 11(1):59-67.
134 Darwin C, Darwin F. 1881. The Power of Movement in Plants, D. Appleton & Co, New York, NY,
USA.
135 Darwin F. 1898. Observations on stomata. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London Ser. B 190:100143.
136 Darwin F. 1911. On a new method of estimating the aperture of stomata. Proc. R. Soc. London B Biol.
Sci. 84:136154.
137 Senn G. 1908. Die Gestalts- und Lagevernderung der Pflanzen-Chromatophoren, Wilhelm Engelmann,
Leipzig, Germany.
138 Shropshire W Jr, Withrow RB. 1958. Action spectrum of phototropic tip-curvature of Avena. Plant
Physiol. 33:360365.
139 Thimann KV, Curry GM. 1960. Phototropism. In Light and Life (McElroy, W.D., ed.), pp. 646672,
Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, MD, USA.
140 Baskin TI, Iino M. 1987. An action spectrum in the blue and ultraviolet for phototropism in Alfalfa.
Photochemistry and photobiology 46(1):127-136.
141 Karlsson PE. 1986. Blue light regulation of stomata in wheat seedling. II. Action spectrum and search for
action dichroism. Physiol. Plant. 66:207210.
142 Eisinger W, Swartz TE, Bogomolni RA, Taiz L. 2000. The ultraviolet action spectrum for stomatal
opening in broad bean. Plant Physiol. 122:99105.
References 63
143 Zurzycki J. 1962. The action spectrum for the light-dependent movements of chloroplasts in Lemna
trisulca L. Acta Soc. Bot. Poloniae 31:489538.
144 Haupt W, Scheuerlein R. 1990. Chloroplast movement. Plant Cell Environ. 13:595614.
145 Briggs WR, Beck CF, Cashmore AR, Christie JM, Hughes J, Jarillo JA, Kagawa T, Kanegae H, Liscum
E, Nagatani A, Okada K, Salomon M, Rudiger W, Sakai T, Takano M, Wada M, Watson JC.. 2001. The
phototropin family of photoreceptors. Plant Cell 13, 993997.
146 Kagawa T, Sakai T, Suetsugu N, Oikawa K, Ishiguro S, Kato T, Tabata S, Okada K, Wada M. 2001.
Arabidopsis NPL1: a phototropin homolog controlling the chloroplast high-light avoidance response.
Science 291, 21382141.
147 Sakai T, Kagawa T, Kasahara M, Swartz TE, Christie JM, Briggs WR, Wada M, Okada K. 2001.
Arabidopsis nph1 and npl1: blue light receptors that mediate both phototropism and chloroplast
relocation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 98, 69696974.
148 Jarillo JA, Gabrys H, Capel J, Alonso JM, Ecker JR, Cashmore AR. 2001. Phototropin-related NPL1
controls chloroplast relocation induced by blue light. Nature 410, 952954.
149 Kinoshita T, Doi M, Suetsugu N, Kagawa T, Wada M, Shimazaki K. 2001. Phot1 and Phot2 mediate
blue light regulation of stomatal opening. Nature 414:656-660.
150 Meijer G. 1968. Rapid growth inhibition of gherkin hypocotyls in blue light. Acta Bot. Neerl. 17:914.
151 Gaba V, Black M. 1979. Two separate photoreceptors control hypocotyl growth in green seedlings.
Nature 278:5154.
152 Cosgrove D. 1981. Rapid suppression of hypocotyl growth by blue light. Plant Physiol. 67:584590.
153 Spalding E, Cosgrove D. 1989. Large plasma-membrane depolarization precedes rapid blue-light-
induced growth inhibition in cucumber. Planta 178:407410.
154 Folta KM, Spalding EP. 2001. Unexpected roles for cryptochrome 2 and phototropin revealed by high-
resolution analysis of blue light-mediated hypocotyl growth inhibition. Plant J. 26:471478.
155 Baum G, . 1999. Stimulation of the blue light phototropic receptor NPH1 causes a transient increase in
cytosolic Ca2+. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 96:1355413559.
156 Garner WW, Allard HA. 1920. Effect of the relative length of day and night and other factors of the
environment on growth and reproduction in plants. Journal of Agricultural Research 18:553-606.
157 Garner WW, Allard HA. 1923. Further studies in photoperiodism, the response of the plant to relative
length of day and night. Journal of Agricultural Research 23:871-920.
158 Hamner KC, Bonner J. 1938. Photoperiodism in relation to hormones as factors in floral initiation and
development. Botanical Gazette 100:388-431.
159 Borthwick HA, Hendricks SB, Parker MW. 1952. The reaction controlling floral initiation. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 38:929-934.
160 Downs RJ. 1956. Photoreversibility of flower initiation. Plant Physiology 31: 279-284.
161 Sage LC. 1992. Pigment of the imagination: a history of phytochrome research. Academic Press, San
Diego.
162 Neil K, Wu J. 2006. Effects of urbanization on plant flowering phenology: A review. Urban Ecosystems
9(3):243-257.
163 Gwinner E. 1986. Circannual rhythms: endogenous annual clocks in the organization of seasonal
processes. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
164 Sharma VK, Chandrashekaran MK, Nongkynrih P. 1997. Daylight and Artificial Light Phase Response
Curves for the Circadian Rhythm in Locomotor Activity of the Field Mouse Mus booduga. Biological
Rhythm Research 28(Suppl. 1):39-49.
References 64
165 Joshi D, Chandrashekaran MK. 1985. Spectral sensitivity of the photoreceptors responsible for phase
shifting the circadian rhythm of activity in the bat, Hipposideros speoris. Journal of Comparative
Physiology A: Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology 156(2):189-198.
166 Halle S, Stenseth NC (eds.). 2000. Activity patterns in small mammals: an ecological approach
(Ecological Studies, 141). Springer, Berlin.
167 Stewart-Oaten A, Murdoch WW, Parker KR. 1986. Environmental Impact Assessment:"
Pseudoreplication" in Time? Ecology 67(4):929-940.
168 Beier P, Noss RF. 1998. Do Habitat Corridors Provide Connectivity? Conservation Biology 12(6):1241.
169 Patel HI, Gupta GD. 1984. A problem of equivalence in clinical trials. Biometrical journal 26(5): 471-
474.
170 McBride GB, Loftis JC, Adkins NC. 1993. What do significance tests really tell us about the
environment? Environmental Management 17(4):423-432.
171 Johnson DH. 1999. The insignificance of statistical significance testing. Journal of Wildlife Management
63:763-772.
172 Murie OJ. 1959. Fauna of the Aleutian Island and Alaska Peninsula. US Fish and Wildlife Service North
American Fauna 61:1-364.
173 Dubey RM. 1990. Some studies on Jatinga bird mystery. Tiger Paper (Bangkok) 17(4):20-25.
174 Nikolaus G, Pearson DJ. 1983. Attraction of nocturnal migrants to car headlights in the Chyulu Hills,
Kenya. Scopus 4:45-46.
175 Herbert AD. 1970. Spatial disorientation in birds. Wilson Bulletin 82:400-419.
176 Gauthreaux SA Jr. 1982. Age-dependent orientation in migratory birds. Pages 68-74 in F. Papi and H.G.
Wallraff (eds.), Avian Navigation. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
177 Hart NS. 2001. The visual ecology of avian photoreceptors. Prog Retin Eye Res. 20(5):675-703.
178 Vorobyev M, Osorio D, Bennett AT, Marshall NJ, Cuthill IC. 1998. Tetrachromacy, oil droplets and bird
plumage colours. J Comp Physiol [A]. 183(5):621-633.
179 Vorobyev M. 2003. Coloured oil droplets enhance colour discrimination. Proc Biol Sci.270(1521):1255-
1261.
180 Wiltschko W, Munro U, Ford H, Wiltschko R. 1993. Red light disrupts magnetic orientation of
migratory birds. Nature 364:525-527.
181 Deutschlander ME, Phillips JB, Borland SC. 1999. The case for light-dependent magnetic orientation in
animals. J Exp Biol. 202 (Pt 8):891-908.
182 Wiltschko W, Wiltschko R. 1999. The effect of yellow and blue light on magnetic compass orientation in
European robins, Erithacus rubecula. Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Neuroethology, Sensory,
Neural, and Behavioral Physiology 184(3):295-299.
183 Wiltschko W, Gesson M, Stapput K, Wiltschko R. 2004. Light-dependent magnetoreception in birds:
interaction of at least two different receptors. Naturwissenschaften. 91(3):130-134.
184 Wiltschko W, Wiltschko R. 2002. Magnetic compass orientation in birds and its physiological basis.
Naturwissenschaften. 89(10):445-452.
185 Hart NS. 2001. The visual ecology of avian photoreceptors. Prog Retin Eye Res. 20(5):675-703.
186 Thomson AL. 1926. Problems of bird-migration, Pp. 333-334. H. F. & G. Witherby, London, UK.
187 Jones J, Francis CM. 2003. The effects of light characteristics on avian mortality at lighthouses. Journal
of Avian Biology 34(4):328-333.
188 Munro JA. 1924. A preliminary report on the destruction of birds at lighthouses on the coast of British
Columbia. Canadian Field-Naturalist 38:141-145, 171-175.
References 65
189 Lewis HF. 1927. Destruction of birds by lighthouses in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec. Canadian
Field-Naturalist 41:44-58, 75-77.
190 Tufts RW. 1928. A report concerning destruction of bird life at lighthouses on the Atlantic coast.
Canadian Field-Naturalist 42:167-172.
191 Hansen L. 1954. Birds killed at lights in Denmark 1886-1939. Videnskabelige Meddelelser fra Dansk
Naturhistorisk Forening 116:269-368.
192 Baldwin DH. 1965. Enquiry into the mass mortality of nocturnal migrants in Ontario: final report.
Ontario Naturalist 3:3-11.
193 Evans Ogden LJ. 1996. Collision Course: The Hazards of Lighted Structures and Windows to Migrating
Birds. Toronto, World Wildlife Fund Canada & the Fatal Light Awareness Program. Available from:
http://www.flap.org/new/ccourse.pdf [2006 November 30].
194 Wallis A. 1981. North Sea gas flares. British Birds 74:536-537.
195 Burke CM, Dovoren GK, Montevecchi WA, Wiese FK. 2005. Seasonal and Spatial Trends of Marine
Birds Along Support Vessel Transects and at Oil Platforms on the Grand Banks. Offshore Oil and Gas
Environmental Effects Monitoring: Approaches and Technologies. Battelle Press, Columbus, Ohio.
196 Sage B. 1979. Flare Up Over North Sea Birds. New Scientist 81:464-466.
197 Bjorge RR. 1987. Bird kill at an oil industry flare stack in northwest Alberta. Canadian Field-Naturalist
101:346-350.
198 Aldrich JW, Graber RR, Munro DA, Wallace GJ, West GC, Cahalane VH. 1966. Report of the
Committee on Bird Protection, 1965. Auk 83:457-467.
199 Kemper CA. 1996. A study of bird mortality at a West Central Wisconsin TV tower from 1957-1995.
The passenger Pigeon 58:219-235.
200 Morris SR, Clark AR, Bhatti LH, Glasgow JL. 2003. Television tower mortality of migrant birds in
Western New York and Youngstown, Ohio. Northeastern Naturalist 10(1):67-76.
201 Clark AR, Bell CE, Morris SR. 2005. Comparison of daily avian mortality characteristics at two
television towers in western New York, 1970-1999. The Wilson Bulletin 117(1):35-43.
202 Verheijen FJ. 1980. The Moon: a Neglected Factor in Studies on Collisions of Nocturnal Migrant Birds
with Tall Lighted and with Aircraft. Die Vogelwarte 30:305-320.
203 Verheijen FJ. 1981. Bird kills at lighted man-made structures: not on nights close to a full moon.
American Birds 35:251-254.
204 Verheijen FJ. 1981. Bird kills at tall lighted structures in the USA in the period 1935-1973 and kills at
Dutch lighthouse in the period 1924-1928 show similar lunar periodicity.
205 Rodhouse PG, Elvidge CD, Trathan PN. 2001. Remote sensing of the global light-fishing fleet: an
analysis of interactions with oceanography, other fisheries and predators. Advances in Marine Biology
39:261-303.
206 Wiese FK, Montevecchi WA, Davoren GK, Huettmann F, Diamond AW, Linke J. 2001. Seabirds at risk
around offshore oil platforms in the north-west Atlantic. Mar Pollut Bull. 42(12):1285-1290.
207 Arcos J, Oro D. 2004. Significance of nocturnal purse seine fisheries for seabirds: a case study off the
Ebro Delta (NW Mediterranean). Marine Biology 141(2):277-286.
208 Weir RD. 1976. Annotated bibliography of bird kills at man-made obstacles: a review of the state of the
art and solutions. Department of Fisheries and the Environment, Environmental Management Service,
Canadian Wildlife Service, Ontario Region, Ottawa.
209 Telfer TC, Sincock JL, Byrd GV, Reed JR. 1987. Attraction of Hawaiian seabirds to lights: conservation
effrots and effects of moon phase. Wildlife Society Bulletin 15:406-411.
210 McNeil R, Drapeau, Pierotti R. 1993. Nocturnality in colonial waterbirds: occurrence, special
adaptations, and suspected benefits. Current Ornithology 10:187-246.
References 66
211 Reed JR, Sincock JL, Hailman JP. 1985. Light attration in endangered procellariiform birds: reduction
by shielding upward radiation. Auk 102:377-383.
212 Cherel Y, Ridoux V. 1992. Prey species and nutritive value of food fed during summer to king penguin
Aptenodytes patagonica chicks at Possession Island, Crozet Archipelago. Ibis. 134(2):118-127.
213 Montevecchi WA, Wiese FK, Davoren GK, Diamond AW, Huettmann F, Linke J. 1999. Seabird
attraction to offshore platforms and seabird monitoring from offshore support vessels and other ships:
literature review and monitoring designs. Report for Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers
(CAPP), Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
214 McFarlane RW. 1963. Disorientation of Loggerhead Hatchlings by Artificial Road Lighting. Copeia
1:153.
215 Salmon M. 2003. Artificial night lighting and sea turtles. Biologist 50(4):163-168.
216 Witherington BE, Freezer NB. 2003. Social and economic aspects of sea turtle conservation. Pages 355-
384 in P.L. Lutz, J.A. Musick, and J. Wyneken (eds.), The biology of sea turtles. Volume II. CRC Press,
Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
217 Lohmann KJ, Witherington BE, Lohmann CMF, Salmon M. 1997. Orientation, navigation, and natal
beach homing in sea turtles. Pages 107-135 in P.L. Lutz, J.A. Musick, and J. Wyneken (eds.), The
biology of sea turtles. Volume I. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
218 Tuxbury SM. 2001. Seafinding orientation of hatchlings exposed to filtered lighting: effects of varying
beach conditions. M.S. thesis, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, USA.
219 Nelson KA. 2002. The effect of filtered high pressure sodium lighting on hatchling loggerhead (Caretta
caretta L.) and green turtle (Chelonia mydas L.) hatchlings. M.S. thesis, Florida Atlantic University,
Boca Raton, USA.
220 Ellis R, Washburn S. 2003. Evaluation of the Safety and User Response to Embedded Roadway Lighting
Systems on an FDOT Demonstration Project. Available from: http://www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/
Completed_Proj/Summary_EMO/FDOT_BC354_31rpt.pdf [2007 Feb 26].
221 Ernest RG, Martin RE. 1998. Coastal roadway lighting manual: a handbook of practical guidelines for
managing street lighting to minimize impacts to sea turtles. Ecological Associates, Inc., Jensen Beach,
Florida, USA.
222 Gibbons JW, Scott DE, Ryan TJ, Buhlmann KA, Tuberville TD, Metts BS, Greene JL, Mills T, Leiden
Y, Poppy S, Winne, CT. 2000. The Global Decline of Reptiles, Deja Vu Amphibians. Bioscience
50(8):653-666.
223 Rice KG, Percival HF, Woodward AR, Jennings ML. 1999. Effects of egg and hatchling harvest on
american alligators in Florida. Journal of Wildlife Management 63:1193-1200.
224 Verheijen FJ. 1958. The mechanisms of the trapping effect of artificial light sources upon animals.
Archives Nelandaises de Zoologie 13:1-107.
225 Southwood TRE. 1978. Ecological methods: with particular reference to the study of insect populations.
Chapman and Hall, London.
226 Savage JM. 2002. The amphibians and reptiles of Costa Rica: a herpetofauna between two continents,
between two seas. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.
227 Cunningham PL. 2002. Colubridae: Lamprophis fuliginosus, brown house-snake. Foraging. African
Herp News 34:28-29.
228 Henderson RW, Powell R. 2001. Responses by the West Indian herpetofauna to humaninfluenced
resources. Caribbean Journal of Science 37:285-288.
229 Perro G, Lazell J. 2000. Liophis portoricensis anegadae. Night-light niche. Herpetological Review
31:247.
References 67
230 Bertolucci C, Sovrano VA, Magnone MC, Foa A. 2000. Role of suprachiasmatic nuclei in circadian and
light-entrained behavioral rhythms of lizards. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 279(6):R2121-
2131.
231 Firth BT, Belan I, Kennaway DJ, Moyer RW. 1999. Thermocyclic entrainment of lizard blood plasma
melatonin rhythms in constant and cyclic photic environments. Am J Physiol. 277(6 Pt 2):R1620-1626.
232 Hyde LL, Underwood H. 2000. Effects of melatonin administration on the circadian activity rhythm of
the lizard Anolis carolinensis. Physiol Behav. 71(1-2):183-192.
233 Pickett STA, Cadenasso ML, Grove JM, Nilon CH, Pouyat RV, Zipperer WC, Costanza R. 2001. Urban
Ecological Systems: Linking Terrestrial Ecological, Physical, and Socioeconomic Components of
Metropolitan Areas. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 32:127-157.
234 Stuart SN, Chanson JS, Cox NA, Young BE, Rodrigues AS, Fischman DL, Waller RW. 2004. Status and
trends of amphibian declines and extinctions worldwide. Science 306(5702):1783-1786.
235 Pounds JA, Bustamante MR, Coloma LA, Consuegra JA, Fogden MP, Foster PN, La Marca E, Masters
KL, Merino-Viteri A, Puschendorf R, Ron SR, Sanchez-Azofeifa GA, Still CJ, Young BE. 2006.
Widespread amphibian extinctions from epidemic disease driven by global warming. Nature
439(7073):161-167.
236 Goin OB. 1958. A comparison of the nonbreeding habits of two treefogs, Hyla squirella and Hyla
cinerea. Quarterly Journal of the Florida Acedemy of Sciences 21:49-60.
237 Long WJ. 1901. Wilderness ways. Boston, MA: Ginn and Company.
238 Warrant EJ. Seeing better at night: life style, eye design and the optimum strategy of spatial and temporal
summation. Vision Res. 39(9):1611-1630.
239 Buchanan BW. 1998. Low-Illumination Prey Detection by Squirrel Treefrogs. Journal of Herpetology
32(2):270-274.
240 Hailman JP, Jaeger RG. 1974. Phototactic responses to spectrally dominant stimuli and use of colour
vision by adult anuran amphibians: A comparative survey. Anim Behav. 22(4):757-795.
241 Muntz WRA. 1962. Effectiveness of different colors of light in releasing positive phototactic behavior of
frogs, and a possible function of the retinal projection to diencephalon. Journal of Neurophysiology
25:712-720.
242 Donner KO, Reuter T. 1962. The spectral sensitivity and photopigment of the green rods in the frog's
retina. Vision Res 2:357-372.
243 Honkavaara J, Koivula M, Korpimki E, Siitari H, Viitala J. 2002. Ultraviolet vision and foraging in
terrestrial vertebrates. Oikos 98(3):505-511.
244 Jaeger RG, Hailman JP. Two types of phototactic behaviour in anuran amphibians. Nature
230(5290):189-190.
245 Hartman JG, Hailman JP. 1981. Interactions of light intensity, spectral dominance and adaptational state
in controlling anuran phototaxis. Zeitschrift fr Tierpsychologie 56:289-296.
246 Baker J. 1990. Toad aggregations under street lamps. British Herpetological Society Bulletin 31:26-27.
247 Schlaepfer MA, Runge MC, Sherman PW. 2002. Ecological and evolutionary traps. Trends in ecology
and evolution 17(10):474-480.
248 Rand AS, Bridarolli ME, Dries L, Ryan MJ. 1997. Light Levels Influence Female Choice in Tungara
Frogs: Predation Risk Assessment? Copeia 2:447-450.
249 Higginbotham AC. 1939. Studies on amphibian activity. I. Preliminary repont on the rhythmic activity of
Bufo americanus Holbrook, and Bufo fowleri Hinckley. Ecology 20:58-70.
250 Vanecek J. 1998. Cellular mechanisms of melatonin action. Physiol Rev. 78(3):687-721.
251 Camargo CR, Visconti MA, Castrucci AM. 1999. Physiological color change in the bullfrog, Rana
catesbeiana. J Exp Zool. 283(2):160-169.
References 68
252 Joshi BN, Udaykumar K. 2000. Melatonin counteracts the stimulatory effects of blinding or exposure to
red light on reproduction in the skipper frog Rana cyanophlyctis. Gen Comp Endocrinol. 118(1):90-95.
253 Binkley S, Mosher K, Rubin F, White B. 1988. Xenopus tadpole melanophores are controlled by dark
and light and melatonin without influence of time of day. J Pineal Res. 5(1):87-97.
254 Lee JH, Hung CF, Ho CC, Chang SH, Lai YS, Chung JG. 1997. Light-induced changes in frog pineal
gland N-acetyltransferase activity. Neurochem Int. 31(4):533-540.
255 Fain GL, Matthews HR, Cornwall MC, Koutalos Y. 2001. Adaptation in vertebrate photoreceptors.
Physiol Rev. 81(1):117-151.
256 Cornell EA, Hailman JP. 1984. Pupillary responses of two Rana pipiens-complex anuran species.
Herpetologica 40(4):356-366.
257 Besharse JC, Witkovsky P. 1992. Light-evoked contraction of red absorbing cones in the Xenopus retina
is maximally sensitive to green light. Vis Neurosci. 8(3):243-249.
258 Fain GL. 1976. Sensitivity of toad rods: Dependence on wave-length and background illumination. J
Physiol. 261(1):71-101.
259 Jaeger RG. 1981. Foraging in optimum light as a niche dimension for neotropical frogs. National
Geographic Society Research Reports 13:297-302.
260 deMaynadier PG, Hunter ML Jr. 1998. Effects of Silvicultural Edges on the Distribution and Abundance
of Amphibians in Maine. Conservation Biology 12(2):340.
261 Welsh HH Jr., Droege S. 2001. A Case for Using Plethodontid Salamanders for Monitoring Biodiversity
and Ecosystem Integrity of North American Forests. Conservation Biology 15(3):558.
262 Sugalski MT, Claussen DL. 1997. Preference for Soil Moisture, Soil pH, and Light Intensity by the
Salamander, Plethodon cinereus. Journal of Herpetology 31(2 ):245-250.
263 Przyrembel C, Keller B, Neumeyer C. 1995. Trichromatic color vision in the salamander (Salamandra
salamandra). Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral
Physiology 176(4):575-586.
264 Schneider CW. 1968. Avoidance learning and the response tendencies of the larval salamander,
Ambystoma punctatum, to photic stimulation. Animal Behaviour 16:492-495.
265 Roth G. 1987. Visual Behavior in salamanders. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
266 Placyk JS Jr., Graves BM. 2001. Foraging Behavior of the Red-Backed Salamander (Plethodon cinereus)
under Various Lighting Conditions. Journal of Herpetology 35(3):521-524.
267 Phillips JB, Deutschlander ME, Freake MJ, Borland SC. 2001. The role of extraocular photoreceptors in
newt magnetic compass orientation: parallels between light-dependent magnetoreception and polarized
light detection in vertebrates. J Exp Biol. 204(Pt 14):2543-2552.
268 Phillips J, Borland S. 1994. Use of a specialized magnetoreception system for homing by the eastern red-
spotted newt notophthalmus viridescens. J Exp Biol. 188(1):275-291.
269 Gern WA, Norris DO, Duvall D. 1983. The effect of light and temperature on plasma melatonin in
neotenic tiger salamanders (Ambystoma tigrinum). Journal of Herpetology 17:228-234.
270 Oishi T, Nagai K, Harada Y, Naruse M, Ohtani M, Kawano E, Tamotsu S. 2004. Circadian Rhythms in
Amphibians and Reptiles: Ecological Implications. Biological Rhythm Research 35(1-2):105-120.
271 Marsh WM, Grossa JM Jr. 2002. Environmental geography: science, land, use, and Earth Systems.
Second edition. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
272 Reebs SG. 2002. Plasticity of diel and circadian activity rhythms in fishes. Reviews in Fish Biology and
Fisheries 12(4):349-371.
273 Boeuf G, Le Bail P-Y. 1999. Does light have an influence on fish growth. Aquaculture 177(1-4):129-
152.
References 69
274 Hobson ES, McFarland WN, Chess JR. 1981. Crepuscular and nocturnal activities of Californian
nearshore fishes, with consideration of their scotopic visual pigments and the photic environment.
Fishery Bulletin 79:1-30.
275 Helfman GS, Collette BB, Facey DE. 1997. The diversity of fishes. Blackwell Science , Oxford, UK.
276 Azuma T, Iwata M. 1994. Influences of illumination intensity on the nearest neighbour distance in coho
salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch. Journal of Fish Biology 45:1113-1118.
277 Wald G, Brown PK, Brown PS. 1957. Visual pigments and depths of habitat of marine fishes. Nature
180:969-971.
278 Folmar LC, Dickhoff WW. 1981. Evaluation of some physiological parameters as predictive indices of
smoltification. Aquaculture 23:309-324.
279 Fields PE. 1966. Final report on migrant salmon light guiding studies (Contract No. D.A.-45-108
CIVENG-63-29) at Columbia River dams. Fisheries Engineering Research Program, U.S. Army
Engineering Division, North Pacific, Corps of Engineers, Portland, Oregon, USA.
280 Prinslow TE, Whitmus CJ, Dawson JJ, Bax NJ, Snyder BP, Salo EO. 1980. Effects of wharf lighting on
outmigrating salmon, 1979. FRI-UW-8008. Fisheries Research Institute, University of Washington,
Seattle, USA.
281 Ratt LD, Salo EO. 1985. Under-pier ecology of juvenile salmonids to strobe and mercury lights. FRI-
UW-8717. Fisheries Research Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
282 Weitkamp DE. 1982. Juvenile chum and chinook salmon behavior at Terminal 91, Seattle, Washington.
Document No. 82-0415-013F. Parametrix, Seattle, USA.
283 Marchesan M, Spoto M, Verginella L, Ferrero EA. 2005. Behavioural effects of artificial light on fish
species of commercial interest. Fisheries Research 73(1-2):171-185.
284 Byrne JE. 1971. Photoperiodic activity changes in juvenile sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka).
Canadian Journal of Zoology 49:1155-1158.
285 Godin JGJ. 1982. Migrations of salmonid fishes during early life history phases: daily and annual timing.
Pages 22-50 in E.L. Brannon and E.O. Salo (eds.), First International Salmon and Trout Migratory
Behavior Symposium. Seattle, Washington, USA.
286 Patrick PH. 1978. Responses of fish to light. Report No. 78-516K. Ontario Hydro Research Division,
Toronto, Canada.
287 Loew ER, McFarland WN. 1990. The underwater visual environment. Pages 1-43 in R.H. Douglas and
M.B.A. Djamgoz (eds.), The visual system of fish, Chapman and Hall, London, UK.
288 Johnson PN, Bouchard K, Goetz. 2005. Effectiveness of strobe lights for reducing juvenile salmonid
entrainment into a navigation lock. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 25:491-501.
289 Puckett KJ, Anderson JJ. 1987. Behavioral reponses of juvenile salmonids to strobe and mercury lights.
FRI-UW-8717. Fisheries Research Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
290 Nemeth RS, Anderson JJ. 1992. Response of Juvenile Coho and Chinook Salmon to Strobe and Mercury
Vapor Lights. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 12:684-692.
291 Frank KD. 1988. Impact of outdoor lighting on moths: An assessment. Journal of the Lepidopterists
Society 42(2):63-93.
292 Steck B. 1997. Zur Einwirkung von Aussenbeleuchtungsanlagen auf nachtaktive Insekten [In German:
On the effect of nearby exterior lighting on nocturnal insects]. LiTG-Publikation 15. Deutsche
Lichttechnische Gesellschaft, Berlin, Germany.
293 Baker RR, Sadovy Y. 1978. The distance and nature of the light-trap response of moths. Nature 276:818-
821.
294 Eguchi E, Watanabe K, Hariyama T, Yamamoto K. 1982. A comparison of electrophysiologically
determined spectral responses in 35 species of Lepidoptera. Journal of Insect Physiology.
References 70
295 Mitchell ER, Agee HR. 1981. Response of beet and fall armyworm moths to different colored lamps in
the laboratory and field. Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A: Environmental Science
and Engineering A16:387-396.
296 McGeachie WJ. 1989. The effects of moonlight illuminance, temperature and wind speed on light-trap
catches of moths. Bulleting of Entomological Research 79:185-192.
297 Nabli H, Bailey WC, Necibi S. 1999. Responses of Lepidoptera in central Missouri to traps with
different light sources. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 72:82-90.
298 Lloyd JE. 2003. On research and entomological education VI: firefly species and lists, old and now.
Florida Entomologist 86:99-113.
299 Lall AB, Seliger HH, Biggley WH, Lloyd JE. 1980. Ecology of colors of firefly bioluminescence.
Science 210:560-562.
300 Bowden J. 1982. An analysis of factors affecting catches of insects in light-traps. Bulletin of
Entomological Research 72:535-556.
301 Nowinszky L, Szab S, Tth G, Ekk I, Kiss M. 1979. The effect of the moon phases and of the intensity
of polarized moonlight on the light-trap catches. Zeitschrift fr Angewandte Entomologie 88:337-353.
302 Mikkola K. 1972. Behavioural and electrophysiological responses of night-flying insects, especially
Lepidoptera, to near-ultraviolet and visible light. Annales Zoologici Fennici 9:225-254.
303 Kolligs D. 2000. kologische Auswirkungen knstlicher Lichtquellen auf nachtaktive Insekten,
insbesondere Schmetterlinge (Lepidoptera) [In German: Ecological effects of artificial light sources on
nocturnally active insects, in particular on moths (Lepidoptera)]. Faunistisch-kologische Mitteilungen
Supplement 28:1-136.
304 Danthanarayana W. 1986. Lunar periodicity of insect flight and migration. Pages 88-119 in W.
Danthanarayana (ed.), Insect flight: dispersal and migration. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
305 Eisenbeis G. 2001. Knstliches Licht and Insekten: eine veergleichende Studie in Rheinhessen [In
German: Artificial light and insects: a comparative study in Rheinhessen (Germany)]. Schriftenreihe fir
Landschaftspflege und Naturschutz 67:75-100.
306 Bauer R. 1993. Untersuchung zur Anlockung von nachtaktiven Insekten durch
Beleuchtungseinrichtungen [In German: Investigation of the attraction of nocturnal insects by artificial
lights]. Diploma thesis, Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, Germany.
307 Schanowski A, Spth V. 1994. berbelichtet: Vorschlge fr eine umweltfreundliche
Aussenbeleuchtung [In German: Overexposed: suggestions for environmentally friendly outside lights].
Naturschutzbund Deutschland (NABU), Kornwestheim.
308 Klyuchko ZF. 1957. On the flight of noctuids (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) towards different light sources.
Doklady: Biological Sciences Section [Biological Sciences Sections of the Proceedings of the Academy
of Sciences of the USSR] 117:951-954.
309 Scheibe MA.1999. ber die Attraktivitt von Straenbeleuchtungen auf Insekten aus nahe gelegenen
Gewssern unter Bercksichtigung unterschiedlicher UV-Emission der Lampen; Natur und Landschaft
74 Jg. Heft 4; 144-146.
310 Gepp J. 1973. Kraftfahrzeugverkehr und fliegende Insekten [In German: Roadway traffic and flying
insects}. Natur und Land (sterreich) 59:127-129.
311 Clark BAJ. 2005. Is artificial light at night too much of a good thing? Clin Exp Optom. 2005
Jul;88(4):197-199.
312 Bullough JD, Rea MS, Figueiro MG. 2006. Of mice and women: Light as a circadian stimulus in breast
cancer research. Cancer Causes and Control 17(4):375-383.
313 Pauley SM. 2004. Lighting for the Human Circadian Clock. Recent research indicates that lighting has
become a public health issue. Online article. Available from:
http://www.darkskysociety.org/handouts/pauley.pdf [August 18 2006].
References 71
314 Parkin DM, Bray FI, Devesa SS. 2001. Cancer burden in the year 2000: the global picture. Eur J Cancer
37:S4S66
315 Hecht SS. 2002. Cigarette smoking and lung cancer: chemical mechanisms and approaches to
prevention. Lancet Oncol. 3(8):461-469.
316 Nagata C, Kawakami N, Shimizu H. 1997. Trends in the incidence rate and risk factors for breast cancer
in Japan. Breast Cancer Res Treat 44:7582.
317 Madigan MP, Ziegler RG, Benichou J, et al. 1995. Proportion of breast cancer cases in the United States
explained by wellestablished risk factors. JNCI 87:16811685.
318 Stevens RG, Rea MS. 2001. Light in the built environment: potential role of circadian disruption in
endocrine disruption and breast cancer. Cancer Causes Control 12:279287.
319 Erren TC, Reiter RJ, Piekarski C. 2003. Light, timing of biological rhythms, and chronodisruption in
man. Naturwissenschaften. 90(11):485-494.
320 Hastings MH, Reddy AB, Maywood ES. 2003. A clockwork web: circadian timing in brain and
periphery, in health and disease. Nat Rev Neurosci 4:649661.
321 Jasser SA, Blask DE, Brainard GC. 2006. Light during darkness and cancer: relationships in circadian
photoreception and tumor biology. Cancer Causes Control 17(4):515-523.
322 Stevens RG. 2006. Artificial lighting in the industrialized world: circadian disruption and breast cancer.
Cancer Causes Control 17:501507.
323 Reiter RJ, Gultekin F, Manchester LC, Tan DX. 2006. Light pollution, melatonin suppression and cancer
growth. J Pineal Res. 40(4):357-358.
324 Stevens RG, Davis S, Thomas DB, Anderson LE, Wilson BW. 1992. Electric power, pineal function, and
the risk of breast cancer. FASEB J 6:853860.
325 Pukkala E, Auvinen A, Wahlberg G. 1995. Incidence of cancer among Finnish airline cabin attendants,
196792. Brit Med J 311:649652.
326 Tynes T, Hannevik M, Andersen A, et al. 1996. Incidence of breast cancer in Norwegian female radio
and telegraph operators. Cancer Causes Control 7:197204.
327 Hansen J. 2001. Increased breast cancer risk among women who work predominantly at night.
Epidemiology 12:7477.
328 Schernhammer ES, Laden L, Speizer FE, et al. 2001. Rotating night shifts and risk of breast cancer in
women participating in the Nurses Health Study. JNCI 93:15631568.
329 Hahn RA. 1991. Profound bilateral blindness and the incidence of breast cancer. Epidemiology 2:208
210.
330 Feychting M, sterlund B, Ahlbom A. 1998. Reduced cancer incidence among the blind. Epidemiology
9:490494.
331 Verkasalo PK, Pukkala E, Stevens RG, Ojamo M, Rudanko S-L. 1999. Inverse association between
breast cancer incidence and degree of visual impairment in Finland. Brit J Cancer 80:14591460.
332 Kliukiene J, Tynes T, Andersen A. 2001. Risk of breast cancer among Norwegien women with visual
impairment. Br J Cancer 84:397399.
333 Czeisler CA, Johnson MP, Duffy JF, Brown EN, Ronda JM, Kronauer RE. 1990. Exposure to bright
light and darkness to treat physiologic maladaptation to night work. N Engl J Med 322:12531259.
334 Dawson D, Campbell SS. 1991. Timed exposure to bright light improves sleep and alertness during
simulated night shifts.Sleep 14:511516.
335 Dawson D, Encel N, Lushington K. 1995. Improving adaptation to simulated night shift: timed exposure
to bright light versus daytime melatonin administration. Sleep 18:1121.
References 72
336 Eastman CI. 1992. High-intensity light for circadian adaptation to a 12-h shift of the sleep schedule. Am
J Physiol Regulatory Integrative Comp Physiol 263:R428R436.
337 Eastman CI, Boulos Z, Terman M, Campbell SS, Dijk DJ, Lewy AJ. 1995. Light treatment for sleep
disorders: Consensus Report. VI. Shift work. J Biol Rhythms 10:157164.
338 Thessing VC, Anch AM, Muehlbach MJ, Schweitzer PK, Walsh JK. 1994. Two- and 4-hour bright-light
exposures differentially effect sleepiness and performance the subsequent night. Sleep 17:140145.
339 Van Cauter E, Turek FW. 1990. Strategies for resetting the human circadian clock. N Engl J Med 322:
13061308.
340 Klerman EB, Rimmer DW, Dijk DJ, Kronauer RE, Rizzo JF III, Czeisler CA. 1998. Nonphotic
entrainment of the human circadian pacemaker. Am J Physiol Regulatory Integrative Comp Physiol
274:R991R996.
341 Nakamura K. 1996. Non-photic entrainment of human circadian clockeffects of forced sleep-wake
schedule on the circadian rhythm in plasma melatonin. Hokkaido Igaku Zasshi 71 403422.
342 Buxton OM, L'Hermite-Balriaux M, Turek FW, van Cauter E. 2000. Daytime naps in darkness phase shift the
human circadian rhythms of melatonin and thyrotropin secretion. Am J Physiol Regulatory Integrative Comp
Physiol 278:373-382.
343 Van Cauter, E., Moreno-Reyes R, Akseki E, LHermite-Balriaux M, Hirschfeld U, Leproult R, Copinschi G. 1998.
Rapid phase advance of the 24-h melatonin profile in response to afternoon dark exposure. Am. J. Physiol.
Endocrinol. Metab. 275:E48E54.
344 Horowitz TS, Cade BE, Wolfe JM, Czeisler CA. 2001. Efficacy of bright light and sleep/darkness
scheduling in alleviating circadian maladaptation to night work. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab.
281(2):E384-391.

Light Pollution: Definition, Measurement, Modeling and Environmental Impacts

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Light Pollution: Definition, Measurement, Modeling and Environmental Impacts

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

B A R C E L O N A , C A T A L U N Y A

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen