next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
<a href="../201507/42136.html">pr
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_00CC_01D0B8FC.D705DF20
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Steve & All, July 7, 2015
You seem to have branched off into a quite unrelated matter; the =
understandable reluctance of professional entomologists to devote =
significant time to helping amateurs.
Backing up a bit-- examining something in detail and generating (or =
consulting) an image of it are complementary activities and have been =
since the dawn of biology/art; 'a picture is worth a thousand words'. =
After plowing through a key, and perhaps taking some wrong turns if this =
is a first passage, it is of great reassurance to see that a dorsal view =
in some reputable source agrees with the unknown. And in the absence of =
this final confirmation (an image) any ID based on passage through an =
unfamiliar key is tentative. =20
And to return to my original point, the beauty of some morphological =
feature in insects (or any organism) can best be seen if suitable =
magnification is used.=20
On the subject of improving attitudes about insects (and other =
mostly harmless animals) there is unfortunately money to be made by =
portraying them as creepy crawlies which must be destroyed.
By chance, a Hammacher Schlemmer catalog arrived in the mail =
yesterday and several items illustrate this:=20
1) for only $64.95 you can buy a bug vacuum which can vacuum "up 24 live =
crickets in only 15 seconds" and is good also for "flies, bees, spiders
and other insects." Best of all this is all done at arm's length (so =
user is safe) and the bugs are killed by an electric grid. Look ma, not =
pesticide.
2) and for only $69.95 you could buy a solar powered bug zapper which =
"eliminates insects ..." within a half acre radius "...without requiring =
proximity to a power outlet." Great use of green power; groan. And Look =
ma, not pesticide
3) and for only $99.95 you can buy four solar insect zappers "and =
harness the sun's energy to efficiently eliminate 100 varieties of =
flying insects." UV light is used to attract insects "to eliminate them =
instantly with a 300 volt electric charge, Look ma, not pesticide.
4) and for only $169.95 you could buy a Mosquito Eliminating UV-A Trap. =
They are attracted by UV light and drawn by a fan into a net where they =
die of dehydration; better than "propane systems that require frequent =
refills or electrocution traps that release pathogens when an insect is =
killed." And the darn bugs are dried out so emptying the net is real =
easy.
YT, DW, Kentville
=20
----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Stephen Shaw" <srshaw@Dal.Ca>
To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2015 2:07 AM
Subject: RE: See a lot by looking: Re: [NatureNS] Queen Bee
> Hi Dave et al,
> Dave you are right on this in principle, as I think has been discussed =
here somewhat before, but practice may be different. Insect =
taxonomists, a rare and non-expanding breed, will always want to see the =
original pinned (dead) specimens to view them from different angles, in =
order to put their names and valued reputations behind an =
identification. But it is not part of busy taxonomists' job to do this, =
so they may do it as an occasional favour to colleagues with plausible =
professional needs, but good luck and likely no chance if you aren't in =
this category, unless it's a very unusual specimen or location. On the =
other hand, some specialists do trawl the submissions to BugGuide and =
will give non-binding but valuable opinions on the identity of images, =
without compromising themselves, and BugGuide itself has accumulated =
consultant 'amateurs' with outside jobs who are just as well informed. =
>=20
> So someone trying to popularize an insect, the original context here, =
needs to get the bug identified at least to genus and hopefully to =
species level in order to start talking at all, and imho there is almost =
no chance to get this done by professionals: so original specimens are =
not practically useful for this but good colour digital images are, if =
submitted to BugGuide.net, Diptera.info (flies) and so on. As you say, =
color in some cases fades in pinned specimens unless it's an =
interference colour, so good colour is an added bonus in images of live =
insects. This is a lesser problem for butterflies where identification =
mostly depends on wing pattern and colour, and an excellent local =
resource for this now exists on-line for NS. I think a good field guide =
for Maine Odonata exists, applicable for NS too. But these are =
relatively small, easy-ID groups compared to flies, hymenoptera and =
beetles. Randy will know that an excellent guide for the 25 or so Deer =
Fly species east of the rockies is available on-line, and there's also a =
good one for hoverflies, but for most fly families there's nothing. I =
don't know, for hymenoptera and beetles.=20
>=20
> The gizmo for temporarily holding pinned specimens to rotate them for =
inspection is a 2-dimensional goniometer, allowing rotation and viewing =
from almost any angle, adjustable about two axes held at right angles. =
I once bought one from BioQuip in California. Google to BioQuip's =
on-line catalogue to see images (under Microscopy) -- they stock two =
goniometers which they call Microscope Stages, #6188 at US$32.95 (mine) =
and #6186, $34.95. Both these would be used mainly under a dissecting =
microscope or with a hand magnifying lens. They are not fancy high-tech =
and yes you could make the 6188 one -- I once did so on a much smaller =
scale for use under compound microscopes which mostly have very small =
working distances, for inspecting insect eye optics from different =
angles at high power. The Bioquip versions are much too tall to allow =
this.
> Steve (Hfx) =20
> ________________________________________
> From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca [naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca] on =
behalf of David & Alison Webster [dwebster@glinx.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 6, 2015 7:57 PM
> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: See a lot by looking: Re: [NatureNS] Queen Bee
>=20
> Hi Steve & All, July 6, 2015
> I didn't intend to limit the concept of suitable magnification, so
> something can be seen clearly, to images. Images are great for =
recording
> color which usually fades in a voucher but, to see an insect in =
detail,
> there is no subtitute for a mounted voucher so it, or select parts, =
can be
> viewed from a number of angles. And when applicable, viewed on a =
number of
> occasions.
> One can buy a fairly expensive gizmo for holding vouchers at any =
desired
> angle or make a good one, mostly from scrap material, for next to =
nothing.
> To quote Brules & Melander (Preface to the1932 edition of =
Classification
> of Insects) "...nor can any comprehension of the i