Effect street light pollution on the photosynthetic efficiency of different plants

References

• Ashmore MR. 2005. Assessing the future global impacts of ozone on vegetation. Plant Cell Environ. 28:949–964.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyce PR. 2003. Human factors in lighting. 2nd ed. London: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Bradshaw WE, Holzapfel CM. 2010. Light, time, and the physiology of biotic response to rapid climate change in animals. Annu Rev Physiol. 72:147–166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruce-White C, Shardlow M. 2011. A review of the impact of artificial light on invertebrates. Peterborough: Buglife.
   Google Scholar
• Cathey AR, Campbell LE. 1975. Effectiveness of five vision‐lighting sources on photo‐regulation of 22 species of ornamental plants. J Am Soc Hortic Sci. 100:65–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cinzano P, Falchi F, Elvidge CD. 2001. The first World atlas of the artificial night sky brightness. Mon Not R Astron Soc. 328:689–707.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darko E, Heydarizadeh P, Schoefs B, Sabzalian MR. 2014. Photosynthesis under artificial light: the shift in primary and secondary metabolism. Phil Trans R Soc B. 369:20130243.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darwin C. 1881. The power of movement in plants. New York (NY): D. Appleton and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Foster RG, Roenneberg T. 2008. Human responses to the geophysical daily, annual and lunar cycles. Curr Biol. 18:R784–R794.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Futsaether C, Vollsnes A, Kruse OMO, Otterholt E, Kvaal K, Eriksen AB. 2009. Effects of the Nordic photoperiod on ozone sensitivity and repair in different clover species studied using infrared imaging. Ambio. 38:437–443.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerrish GA, Morin JG, Rivers TJ, Patrawala Z. 2009. Darkness as an ecological resource: the role of light in partitioning the nocturnal niche. Oecologia. 160:525–536.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Health Council of the Netherlands (2000). Impact of Outdoor Lighting on Man and Nature Publication No. 2000/25E. The Hague: Health Council of the Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Hölker F, Moss T, Griefahn B, Kloas W, Voigt CC, Henckel D, Hänel A, Kappeler PM, Völker S, Schwope A, et al. 2010a. The dark side of light: a transdisciplinary research agenda for light pollution policy. Ecol Soc. 15:13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hölker F, Wolter C, Perkin EK, Tockner K. 2010b. Light pollution as a biodiversity threat. Trends Ecol Evol. 25:681–682.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunt R. 1844. Researches on light: an examination of all the phenomena connected with the chemical and molecular changes produced by the influence of the solar rays. London (UK): Longman, Brown Green and Longmans.
   Google Scholar
• Hunt R. 1854. Researches on light in its chemical relations: embracing a consideration of all the photographic processes. London (UK): Longman, Brown Green and Longmans.
   Google Scholar
• Raven JA, Cockell CS. 2006. Influence on photosynthesis of starlight, moonlight, planetlight and light pollution (reflections on photosynthetically active radiation in the universe). Astrobiology. 6:668–675.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristiansen K. 1988. Light quality regulates flower initiation, differentiation and development of Campanula carpatica Jacq. ‘Karl Forster’. Scientia Horticulturae. 35:275–283.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kronfeld-Schor N, Dayan T. 2003. Partitioning of time as an ecological resource. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 34:153–181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin C. 2000. Photoreceptors and regulation of flowering time. Plant Physiol. 123:39–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longcore T, Rich C. 2004. Ecological light pollution. Front Ecol Environ. 2:191–198.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martineau V, Lefsrud M, Naznin MT. 2012. Comparison of light-emitting diode and high pressure sodium light treatments for hydroponics growth of Boston lettuce. Hort Sci. 47:477–482.
   Google Scholar
• Matzke EB. 1936. The effect of street lights in delaying leaf‐fall in certain trees. Am J Bot. 23:446–452.
   Google Scholar
• Navara KJ, Nelson RJ. 2007. The dark side of light at night: physiological, epidemiological and ecological consequences. J Pineal Res. 34:215–224.
   Google Scholar
• Neff MM, Fankhauser C, Chory J. 2000. Light: an indicator of time and place. Genes Dev. 14:257–271.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neljubov D. 1901. Uber die horizontale Nutation der Stengel von Pisum sativum und einiger anderen Pflanzen. Beih Bot Zentralbl. 10:128–139.
   Google Scholar
• Outen AR. 1998. The possible ecological implications of artificial lighting. Hertfordshire: Hertfordshire Biological Records Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Perkin EK, Hölker F, Richardson JS, Sadler JP, Wolter C, Tockner K. 2011. The influence of artificial light on stream and riparian ecosystems: questions, challenges, and perspectives. Ecosphere. 2:122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ragni M, D’Alcalà MR. 2004. Light as an information carrier underwater. J Plankton Res. 26:433–443.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rich C, Longcore T. 2006a. Introduction. In: Rich C, Longcore T, editors. Ecological consequences of artificial night lighting. Washington: Island Press; p. 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Schreuder D. 2010. Outdoor lighting: physics, vision and perception. New York (NY): Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Smith H. 1982. Light quality, photoperception and plant strategy. Annu Rev Plant Physiol. 33:481–518.
   Google Scholar
• Smith H. 2000. Phytochromes and light signal perception by plants – an emerging synthesis. Nature. 407:585–591.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strasser RJ, Eggenberg P, Strasser BJ. 1996. How to work without stress but with fluorescence: a protocol of a course of the european science foundation in biophysics of photosynthesis at the university of liege. Bulletin De La Societe Royale Des Sciences De Liege. 65(4–5):330–349.
   Google Scholar
• van Langevelde F, Ettema JA, Donners M, WallisDeVries MF, Groenendijk D. 2011. Effect of spectral composition of artificial light on the attraction of moths. Biol Conserv. 144:2274–2281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verheijen FJ. 1958. The mechanisms of the trapping effect of artificial light sources on animals. Archives Néerlandaises De Zoologie. 13:1–107.
   Google Scholar
• Verheijen FJ. 1985. Photopollution: artificial light optic spatial control systems fail to cope with. Incidents, causations, remedies. Exp Biol. 1985:1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Vollsnes AV, Eriksen AB, Otterholt E, Kvaal K, Oxaal U, Futsaether CM. 2009. Visible foliar injury and infrared imaging show that daylength affects short-term recovery after ozone stress in Trifolium subterraneum. J Exp Bot. 60:3677–3686.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar