The effect of artificial light on male breeding-season behaviour in green frogs, Rana clamitans melanota

By B. J. Baker, J. Richardson. 2006

117 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The lunar cycle: a cue for amphibian reproductive phenology? (2009, background): “However, levels of ecological light pollution (ELP), which may disrupt normal amphibian breeding activity (Baker & Richardson 2006; Buchanan 2006) differed between sites.”
Behavioural responses to human‐induced environmental change (2011, background): “Male green frogs (Rana clamitans melanota), for instance, produce less advertisement calls and move more frequently under artificial light than in ambient light (Baker & Richardson, 2006).”
Evolution and behavioural responses to human-induced rapid environmental change (2011, background): “…artificial light can cause sea turtle hatchlings to fatally move inland rather than to the ocean (Tuxbury and Salmon 2005) and can result in reduced activity (and thus reduced foraging success) at night (Kotler 1984; Baker and Richardson 2006), or shifts in the timing of activity (Miller 2006).”
The ecological impacts of nighttime light pollution: a mechanistic appraisal (2013, background): “Examples of such disruption have been documented for moths and other insects (e.g. Frank, 1988), frogs (Baker & Richardson, 2006), reptiles (e.g. Salmon et al., 1995), birds (e.g. Gauthreaux & Belser, 2006; Rodríguez et al., 2012), and mammals (Beier, 1995; Rydell, 2006).”