Moth responses to sympathetic hedgerow management in temperate farmland.

Hedgerows provide valuable habitats and corridors for many species in farmland, yet a lack of appropriate management may threaten their benefits to biodiversity. Although agri-environment scheme (AES) prescriptions on hedgerow management have the potential to reverse the detrimental effect of over-trimming on wildlife, their effectiveness has rarely been addressed. The aims of the study were to (i) assess moth responses to trimming regimes; and (ii) investigate the influence of the surrounding landscape on moth assemblages. We specifically tested the effectiveness of the trimming regime recommended by the targeted AES that was implemented on farms near greater horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus ferrumequinum) colonies since it represented the most sympathetic hedgerow management option among English AES options. We sampled adult micro- and macro-moths along 64 hedgerows located within 20 English farms using light traps, and classified moths into two guilds reflecting their larval food preferences, namely grass/herb- and shrub/tree-feeders. Our results suggest that reducing trimming has a positive impact on macro-moth species richness as well as on shrub/tree-feeder abundance and species richness. It also benefited four moth species that are significantly declining in Britain. Furthermore, while the proportion of woodland at a large spatial scale (3.0 km radius around the sampling sites) was positively associated with the abundance of macro-moths and grass/herb-feeders, woodland connectivity had a positive effect on the species richness of grass/herb- and shrub/tree-feeders at large and medium (1.5 km radius) scales, respectively. Both the abundance and species richness of macro-moths and the abundance of shrub/tree-feeders were negatively affected by the presence of arable fields adjacent to hedgerows. Overall, these findings reveal the wider biodiversity benefits of targeted AESs focusing on habitat improvement for R. ferrumequinum, and the importance of woodland in the wider landscape. We therefore strongly recommend implementing a multi-scale management approach (i.e. from field to landscape) through the use of adequate AES prescriptions to conserve moths in agricultural landscapes.

Experimentally comparing the attractiveness of domestic lights to insects: Do LEDs attract fewer insects than conventional light types?

LED lighting is predicted to constitute 70% of the outdoor and residential lighting markets by 2020. While the use of LEDs promotes energy and cost savings relative to traditional lighting technologies, little is known about the effects these broad-spectrum "white" lights will have on wildlife, human health, animal welfare, and disease transmission. We conducted field experiments to compare the relative attractiveness of four commercially available "domestic" lights, one traditional (tungsten filament) and three modern (compact fluorescent, "cool-white" LED and "warm-white" LED), to aerial insects, particularly Diptera. We found that LEDs attracted significantly fewer insects than other light sources, but found no significant difference in attraction between the "cool-" and "warm-white" LEDs. Fewer flies were attracted to LEDs than alternate light sources, including fewer Culicoides midges (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Use of LEDs has the potential to mitigate disturbances to wildlife and occurrences of insect-borne diseases relative to competing lighting technologies. However, we discuss the risks associated with broad-spectrum lighting and net increases in lighting resulting from reduced costs of LED technology.