MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406624555 · doi:10.1002/fee.2832

Global artificial light masks biologically important light cycles of animals

2025· review· en· W4406624555 on OpenAlexaff
Brett Seymoure, Rachel T. Buxton, Jeremy White, Kurt M. Fristrup, Kevin R. Crooks, George Wittemyer, Lisa M. Angeloni

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Ecology and the Environment · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicImpact of Light on Environment and Health
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNational Park Service
KeywordsArtificial lightEnvironmental scienceOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We document the importance of low‐light conditions in 136 animal species and then translate the new world atlas of skyglow, which reports artificial night sky brightness, into estimates of anthropogenic illuminance (that is, artificial light reaching Earth's surface). Quantifying habitat illuminance from skyglow facilitates understanding of the disruption of natural light cycles, such as new moon conditions, which are critical to animal ecology. We corroborated this transformation of sky brightness by comparing concurrent field measurements of skyglow and illuminance. We then quantified global artificial illuminance caused by skyglow, finding that skyglow artificially doubled illuminance of new moon conditions—a critical phase for biological processes, such as foraging, courtship, and mating—for 22.9% of the Earth's terrestrial surface, 51.0% of Key Biodiversity Areas, 77.1% of Global Protected Areas, and ~20% of highly diverse areas for mammals, birds, and amphibians. We provide summaries of artificial illuminance at 750‐m pixel resolution for each protected area to aid land managers and guide policy in reducing skyglow in areas that may yield the greatest benefits for conserving animal biodiversity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Ecology and the EnvironmentSame topicImpact of Light on Environment and HealthFrench-language works237,207