Black Arches moth. Credit Dr Emmanuelle Briolat

Black Arches moth (Credit: Dr Emmanuelle Briolat)

In A Nutshell

  • White LED streetlights reduce moth activity by 85% compared to natural darkness, essentially freezing the insects in place throughout the night instead of just attracting them.
  • “Wildlife-friendly” amber lights still suppress moth activity by more than half, despite being marketed and adopted specifically to reduce harm to nocturnal insects.
  • Even extremely dim artificial light affects some moth species, including intensities as low as skyglow levels that blanket most developed regions.
  • No LED technology tested offered a solution. High-tech RGB lights engineered to avoid disrupting insect vision performed just as badly or worse than conventional bulbs.

Moths have been disappearing from backyards and forests across the globe, and scientists may have just uncovered a major reason why. Research reveals that the very lights designed to make human nights safer could be freezing moths in their tracks, suppressing their activity by a staggering 85% under standard white LED streetlight conditions compared to natural darkness.

Even the amber-colored bulbs promoted as “wildlife-friendly” alternatives knocked moth activity down by more than half, raising serious questions about whether any modern lighting technology can truly protect these essential nighttime pollinators.

British researchers spent two summers catching wild moths and watching what happened when different types of LED lights clicked on overhead. While the moths flew toward lights, a phenomenon everyone from backyard enthusiasts to scientists has long observed, something else happened. The lights appeared to flip an “off switch” in behavior, sharply reducing movement throughout the entire night. Out of 843 moths representing 23 different species, the pattern held remarkably consistent: when the lights came on, the moths essentially stopped living their normal lives.

This behavior matters far beyond a single night of disrupted activity. Moths pollinate crops and wildflowers under cover of darkness, feed countless bat and bird species, and break down decaying plant matter. When artificial light keeps them motionless for hours on end, those ecological jobs don’t get done. With insect populations already plummeting worldwide and streetlights continuing to multiply, understanding exactly how different types of lighting affect moth behavior has become urgent.

Testing Moths in the Real World

Lead researcher Emmanuelle Sophie Briolat and her team from the University of Exeter wanted to see what actually happens to moths under streetlights, not just in a lab. So they set up their experiments outdoors, letting the insects experience real weather, natural darkness, and everything else a typical British summer night could throw at them.

The setup was clever in its simplicity. Each moth spent one night in a cone-shaped chamber with cameras overhead, snapping photos every 10 seconds from dusk until dawn. Some chambers stayed dark, lit only by stars and moon. Others glowed with different LED types: standard white bulbs like most streetlights, amber bulbs marketed as less harmful to wildlife, and even specially engineered lights designed to be less disruptive to insect vision.

All lights were set to 10 lux, about as bright as standing directly under a streetlamp. The research team tested 23 common species, from familiar peppered moths to silver Y moths, capturing the diversity of behavior patterns across different moth families.

moth experiment
The experimental setup. (Credit: Dr Emmanuelle Briolat)

When “Wildlife-Friendly” Lights Aren’t Friendly Enough

When researchers analyzed thousands of hours of footage, the damage became clear. White LEDs hit moths the hardest with that 85% activity drop. But here’s where things get uncomfortable for conservation efforts: the amber lights cities have been switching to, believing they’re doing the right thing, still crushed moth activity by 57% to 73%.

Many cities and parks have invested real money in amber lighting specifically to protect nocturnal insects. These lights lack the blue wavelengths thought to mess with insect vision, and earlier studies suggested moths found them less attractive. Turns out, less attractive doesn’t seem to mean less harmful. Moths might not fly toward amber lights as eagerly, but once they’re exposed, the behavioral shutdown happens anyway.

The researchers even tested high-tech RGB LED combinations, lights engineered by mixing red, green, and blue to avoid wavelengths that overlap with moth vision while still looking normal to humans. These should have been the solution. They weren’t. RGB lights performed just as badly as conventional bulbs, sometimes worse.

Between 65% and 100% of the species tested, depending on the light type, showed lower activity under artificial light than in darkness. Some went from spending half their time moving under natural conditions to barely moving at all. And it wasn’t just about how much they moved. The lights scrambled when moths were active, disrupting the species-specific rhythms that govern their lives.

Even Very Dim Artificial Light Can Shut Down Moth Behavior

The team ran additional experiments with much dimmer lights, hoping to find a threshold where moths could function normally. At 1 lux, 10 times dimmer than a streetlight, white LEDs still significantly reduced activity. Some species showed suppressed movement even at 0.1 lux, barely brighter than the skyglow that now washes across most developed regions.

Amber lights at extreme dimness finally stopped having statistically significant effects overall. But individual species told a different story. Even at minimal intensities, some moths still couldn’t shake off the behavioral disruption.

This creates a real problem for mitigation strategies. Lighting professionals and conservationists have pushed dimmer lights and amber spectrums as solutions. This research suggests those strategies might nibble at the edges of the problem without solving it. Only lights so dim they barely serve human purposes came close to harmlessness, and even then, not for every species.

The Hidden Cost of Frozen Moths

Activity suppression might sound less dramatic than moths spiraling into flames, but the consequences could devastate populations just as thoroughly. Moths frozen in place all night aren’t pollinating flowers, aren’t feeding to fuel reproduction, aren’t finding mates or laying eggs. They’re also easy targets for any predator hunting by artificial light.

Scientists still don’t fully understand why moths go nearly motionless under artificial light. The behavior looks like what researchers call “inhibition,” where light essentially paralyzes an insect that should be active in darkness. Moth enthusiasts report seeing individual insects stay put at lit surfaces for days, not hours. If this happens anywhere moths encounter artificial lighting, the effects across landscapes full of streetlights could be significant.

Multiple studies have documented moth population declines across Europe and North America in recent decades. Species that are nocturnal, attracted to light, or living in light-polluted areas are declining faster than others. One powerful study in the Netherlands directly linked long-term artificial lighting exposure to reduced moth abundance. But connecting light pollution to population crashes requires understanding what lights actually do to moth behavior, not just that moths get attracted.

The ecological ripple effects extend beyond moths themselves. Bats and birds that depend on moths for food could go hungry. Flowers that rely on moth pollination might not set seed. Plants that need moths to break down their decaying matter might accumulate debris. Night-time ecosystems have evolved over millions of years with predictable patterns of darkness. Modern lighting scrambles those patterns across entire continents.

green moth
Common Emerald moth (Credit: Dr Emmanuelle Briolat)

No Easy Technological Fix

After testing multiple LED technologies at various intensities on nearly two dozen moth species, the research team reached a stark conclusion. Every type of outdoor lighting bright enough to serve human needs caused substantial harm to moths. No clever combination of color and brightness emerged as a clear solution.

Amber lighting at extremely low intensities performed least badly, but calling that a solution feels like a stretch. Modern LED streetlights illuminate cities, suburbs, and rural roads worldwide, and their numbers keep growing. LED efficiency and low operating costs have made outdoor lighting cheaper than ever, encouraging more lights in more places.

Modern outdoor lighting, regardless of its specific color or technology, appears to profoundly disrupt moths’ ability to live normal lives during darkness. Short of eliminating streetlights or dimming them so much they stop serving human needs, no technological fix appears adequate.


Paper Notes

Study Limitations

All experiments took place at a single location in Cornwall, UK, during two summer field seasons in 2023 and 2024. Regional and seasonal variation in moth communities, behavior, and natural light conditions could affect how broadly these results apply elsewhere.

Moths could not escape from the experimental chambers, experiencing continuous light exposure throughout the entire night. In natural settings, moths might move away from lit areas or find dark refuges. Whether moths regularly avoid lit areas in the wild, and how far they might travel to find darkness, remains unknown.

The study examined only adult moths and measured only general activity levels. Artificial lighting could affect larvae, pupae, or eggs differently, and might affect specific behaviors like mating or feeding in ways that don’t show up in simple movement measurements. Sample sizes varied across species, with some represented by just a handful of individuals while others had dozens.

Funding and Disclosures

This research was supported by the Natural Environment Research Council through grant NE/W006359/1 awarded to Briolat, Galloway, Bennie, Gaston, and Troscianko. Wright received support from Wellcome Trust grant 220540/Z/20/A. The authors declared no competing interests. Experiments were approved by the University of Exeter’s ethics committee under Application ID 515517.

Publication Details

Authors: Emmanuelle Sophie Briolat, James A. M. Galloway, Elliott Cornelius, Charlotte J. Wright, Jonathan Bennie, Kevin J. Gaston, and Jolyon Troscianko | Affiliations: Centre for Ecology and Conservation, School of Geography, and Environment and Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter—Penryn Campus, Penryn, Cornwall, UK; Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, UK; Tree of Life, Wellcome Sanger Institute, Hinxton, UK | Journal: Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences | Title: “Severe and widespread reductions in night-time activity of nocturnal moths under modern artificial lighting spectra” | Volume/Issue: Volume 293: 20252704 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2025.2704 | Publication Date: Received October 21, 2025; Accepted December 12, 2025 | Data Availability: All data and code are available in Dryad at https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.jq2bvq8ps

About StudyFinds Analysis

Called "brilliant," "fantastic," and "spot on" by scientists and researchers, our acclaimed StudyFinds Analysis articles are created using an exclusive AI-based model with complete human oversight by the StudyFinds Editorial Team. For these articles, we use an unparalleled LLM process across multiple systems to analyze entire journal papers, extract data, and create accurate, accessible content. Our writing and editing team proofreads and polishes each and every article before publishing. With recent studies showing that artificial intelligence can interpret scientific research as well as (or even better) than field experts and specialists, StudyFinds was among the earliest to adopt and test this technology before approving its widespread use on our site. We stand by our practice and continuously update our processes to ensure the very highest level of accuracy. Read our AI Policy (link below) for more information.

Our Editorial Process

StudyFinds publishes digestible, agenda-free, transparent research summaries that are intended to inform the reader as well as stir civil, educated debate. We do not agree nor disagree with any of the studies we post, rather, we encourage our readers to debate the veracity of the findings themselves. All articles published on StudyFinds are vetted by our editors prior to publication and include links back to the source or corresponding journal article, if possible.

Our Editorial Team

Steve Fink

Editor-in-Chief

John Anderer

Associate Editor

Leave a Comment

1 Comment

  1. Jose Lopez says:

    How about they try the color and spectrum of a Full Moon. That would cover their needs and ours.