Geobotanical monitoring of light pollution in urban nature protected areas (the case study of the Vorobyovy gory nature reserve in Moscow)

Aim. Assessment of the light pollution impact on the vegetation cover in the Vorobyovy Gory nature reserve.

Methodology.  The principle investigation methods were the following: system geoecological analysis (including characteristics of natural landscapes and anthropogenic load), geobotanical observation (changes in species composition, abundance and phenophase of terrestrial plants) and instrumental measurements of the illumination intensity measured by luxmeter. To monitor the transformation of the grass vegetation cover, 8 test sites were laid: background and light pollution testing sites. Comparison of identical species of the nature reserve flora in neighboring illuminated and unlit areas (10×10 m) within the same landscape tract fragments was carried out.

Results. The study showed that the effect of light pollution on the natural vegetation cover affects its structure, species abundance as well as rhythms of their development. Geobotanical study of plant species composition at these sites allowed us to identify 21 plant species of different sensitivity to the level of illumination of their habitats. These species may be used for further monitoring of light pollution impact on vegetation cover (Ficaria verna, Campanula sp., Vicia sylvatica, Anemone ranunculoides, etc.).

Research implications. Geobotanical methods for light pollution monitoring are proposed.

1. Sobolev N. A., ed. Krasnaya kniga goroda Moskvy [The Red Book of the City of Moscow]. Moscow, 2022. 848 p.

2. Krasovskaya T. M., Lukyanov L. E. [Anthropogenic triggers of landscape rhythms]. in: Kolmakova E. G., ed. Materialy I Belorusskogo geograficheskogo kongressa. T. 5 [Proceedings of the 1st Belarusian Geographical Congress. Vol. 5] Minsk, BSU Publ., 2024, pp. 174–178.

3. Lukashov A. A. [Geological and geomorphological structure and morphodynamics of the Sparrow Hills (Moscow)]. in: Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 5. Geografiya [Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 5. Geography], 2008, no. 5, pp. 68–73.

4. Lukyanov L. E. [Methodology for studying light pollution in urban protected areas]. in: ivansova E.A., ed. Antropogennaya transformatsiya geoprostranstva: menyayushchiysya mir – shtrikhi k portretu [Anthropogenic transformation of geospace: a changing world – strokes to a portrait]. Volgograd, VSU Publ., 2024, pp. 46–50.

5. Malakhova S. D., Tyutyunkova M. V., Fedorova Z. S., Demyanenko E. V. [LED lighting in growing vegetable crops]. in: [Problems of regional ecology], 2019, no. 5, pp. 29–33. Doi: 10.24411/1728-323X-2019-17029

6. Smashevsky N. D. [Ecology of photosynthesis]. in: Astrakhanskiy vestnik ekologicheskogo obrazovaniya [Astrakhan Bulletin of Environmental Education], 2014, no. 2, pp. 165–180.

7. Anderson M., Rotheray E. L., Mathews F. Marvellous moths! pollen deposition rate of bramble (Rubus futicosus L. agg.) is greater at night than day // PLoS oNE. 2023. № 18. Doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281810

8. Wang S., Wang Z., Xiao L., Zhang H., Liu Y. Artificial light at night advances reproductive phenology and reduces reproductive capacity of a wild plant. in: bioRxiv, 2022, iss. 280, pp. 1–27. Doi: 10.1101/2022.12.11.519667

9. Bucher S. F., Uhde L., Weigelt A., Cesarz S., Eisenhauer N., Gebler A., Kyba C., et al. Artificial light at night decreases plant diversity and performance in experimental grassland communities. in: Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological sciences, 2023, no. 378. Doi: 10.1098/rstb.2022.0358

10. Bani A. S., Fraser K. C. The influence of different light wavelengths of anthropogenic light at night on nestling development and the timing of post-fledge movements in a migratory songbird. in: Frontier in Ecology and Evolution, 2021, no. 9. Doi: 10.3389/fevo.2021.735112

11. Brayley o., How M. J., Wakefield A. The Biological Effects of Light Pollution on Terrestrial and Marine organisms. in: International Journal of Sustainable Lighting, 2022, no. 24, pp. 13–38. Doi: 10.26607/ijsl.v24i1.121

12. Kyba C., Altıntaş Y. Ö., Walker C. E., Newhouse M. Citizen scientists report global rapid reductions in the visibility of stars from 2011 to 2022. in: Science, 2020, no. 379, pp. 265–268. Doi: 10.1126/science.abq7781

13. Škvareninová J., Tuhárska M., Skvarenina J., Babalova D., Slobodniková L., Slobodník B., Středová H., et al. Effects of light pollution on tree phenology in the urban environment. in: Moravian Geographical Reports, 2017, no. 25, pp. 282–290. Doi: 10.1515/mgr-2017-0024

14. Avalon C. S., Precillia C., Joanna D., Bridgette F., Elizabeth K. P., Brett S. Light pollution is driver of insect declines. in: Biological Conservation, 2020, no. 241, pp. 1–9. Doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3378835

15. Macgregor C. J., Pocock M. J., Fox R., Evans D. Pollination by nocturnal Lepidoptera, and the effects of light pollution: a review. in: Ecological Entomology, 2014, no. 40, pp. 187–198. Doi: 10.1111/een.12174

16. Padhiyar D. H., Chaudhary D. V., Thakar P. K. impact of Light Pollution on insects. in: Agriculture & Food: E-Newsletter, 2023, vol. 5, iss. 2, pp. 15–17.

17. Liu Y., Speißer B., Knop E., Kleunen van M. The Matthew effect: Common species become more common and rare ones become more rare in response to artificial light at night. in: Global Change Biology, 2022, no. 28, pp. 1–9. Doi: 10.1111/gcb.16126

18. Wonderlin N. E., Rumfelt K., White P. J. T. Associations between nocturnal moths and flowers in urban gardens: evidence from pollen on moths. in: Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society, 2019, no. 73, pp. 173–176. Doi: 10.18473/lepi.73i3.a6