Sunday, 28 December 2014

Entomological Collections

Their Historic Importance and Relevance in the 21st Century.

Sir David Attenborough with Wallace's Giant Bee Megachile pluto (OUMNH)

“Due to the care of past curators, we can (for example) still handle specimens actually from Linnaeus's personal cabinets, as well as others collected and prepared by later giants in the history of biology, Raffles, Darwin and Wallace among them. Ownership of these collections in trust carries an obligation to maintain them in good state and to make them accessible to enquirers and research workers at home and abroad” (Earl of Cranbrook, taken from Paine 1992).

The aim of this article is to provide what I hope is a balanced and thought-provoking personal view on both the historic importance, and contemporary relevance, of entomological collections and collecting. It is not, by any means, intended to present a position endorsed by any individual or organization, or to encourage collecting without appropriate research based justification or consideration of the Invertebrate Link (Joint Committee for the Conservation of British Invertebrates) code (see below). Rather, its fundamental objective is to enlighten readers in a subject that is frequently controversial, due to a lack of understanding of the reasons for collecting and killing specimens, which consequently generates diverse and conflicting opinions.

The Invertebrate Link (JCCBI) code is applicable to all terrestrial and freshwater invertebrates in the UK - not just insects. The code, out of necessity, defines certain activities that should be avoided or restricted but it equally emphasises the need to collect invertebrates in order to gain valuable information, much of which can aid conservation. There are currently 36 member organisations, including the leading conservation charities, entomological societies and statutory agencies, represented on the committee (Invertebrate Link (JCCBI), 2002).

What use is a library that stops acquiring books?

Photomicrography and the digital recording of historic specimens (Mark Colvin)

Entomological collections, indeed any collection of natural history specimens, are libraries of natural objects such as insects, mammals, birds, plants and fungi. Such items are collected and preserved because they form a rich foundation upon which to study the natural world by, for example, providing the basis for identification of organisms, mapping their distribution and providing the means for facilitating research led conservation. By storing the physical object and not only an image or description of the natural organism, natural history collections aim to maximize the possibilities for new scientific discoveries (Dincă et al., 2011; Pittino, 2006).

Within biodiversity research, taxonomists and evolutionary biologists are the traditional users of natural history collections. But the result of their work is only one part of these collections’ value. For environmental research, agriculture, genomics, climate studies, epidemiology, ecological niche modeling for conservation, public health, and many other areas of research, collections have become indispensible and several such studies are considered later in this article. Crucially, collections will continue to answer questions that are unrelated to the reasons for their original establishment (Ownes and Duin, 2008; Society for the Preservation of Natural History Collections, 2010).

Not just a load of dead insects …

The essential work of the entomological Curator (Mark Colvin)

Natural history collections worldwide house an estimated 3 billion preserved specimens together with their collective data. This represents an immense knowledge base of global biodiversity (Ownes and Duin, 2008).

Museum specimens, particularly well-represented taxa such as butterflies and beetles, can provide us with data for investigating the effects of climate change, habitat modification and loss due to anthropogenic activity and the resulting distributional changes over time, often spanning many decades. Although many historic specimens housed in museums and private collections will be unsuitable for molecular research (due to their age, methods of preparation or preservation) there are still many that can provide scientists with valuable data.

For example, in the case of the Adonis Blue butterfly Polyommatus bellargus, researchers amplified microsatellite DNA from museum specimens over 100 years old to examine population changes over time (Harper et al., 2006) and were able to extract data from specimens where the populations had become extinct through habitat loss. Another example involves the British Swallowtail butterfly Papilio machaon, where researchers undertook a morphometric study that showed populations at the Norfolk sites and those at Wicken Fen (Cambridgeshire) differed in several wing characteristics; Norfolk specimens were also generally larger. These differences were most marked between 1890 and 1920, but a study of more recent specimens showed that these differences were almost lost. Differences in size give little indication of selection pressures operating on individuals, whereas differences in shape may be far more informative, since these may reflect changes in function (Dempster et al., 1976). It is impossible to do more than speculate at what changes in shape mean in terms of an animal's biology, but one characteristic that is likely to be influenced by shape is mobility.

In Norfolk the swallowtail butterfly is a strong flyer and adults are frequently seen outside of their fen habitat. There is no way of knowing whether the Wicken race was as mobile as the Norfolk race, but selection pressures against emigration must have been high, since there was no other suitable breeding habitat within 160 km. If one assumes that the two populations originated from a single East Anglian stock, then it is probable that differences arose after the Wicken population became isolated. It is tempting to believe that the reduced size of the habitat available to the butterfly at Wicken led to selection against mobility and that this resulted in changes in body shape (Dempster et al., 1976).

More recently, it has become possible to extract nucleic acids from dry insects, in order to undertake DNA analysis and associated studies, without causing external morphological damage (Gilbert et al., 2007); an important consideration with extremely rare or ‘type’ specimens - the specimen(s) on which the description and scientific name of a new species is formally based.

Providing methodologies are scientifically robust, most reputable natural history museums will provide access to specimens to researchers for both traditional and molecular research. Traditional research includes morphological studies (the branch of biology dealing with the study of the form and structure of organisms and their specific structural features), and data mining (extracting verifiable data from a specimen’s data label(s) and the computational process of discovering patterns in large data sets). Molecular research includes population genetics (the study of the distributions and changes in genetic makeup in a population), barcoding (a taxonomic method that uses a short genetic marker in an organism's DNA to identify it as belonging to a particular species) and molecular systematics (the use of molecular genetics to study the evolution of relationships among individuals and species).

Example Areas of Research

Population Genetics

Population genetics considers changes in the distribution and genetic makeup of a population as it is subject to the four main evolutionary processes of natural selection, genetic drift (the change in allele frequencies), mutation and gene flow (the transfer of genes between populations).

By sampling genetic material from specimens of the Adonis Blue butterfly, P. bellargus over 100 years old, and then comparing the results with samples taken from the same site and from other extant populations 200 generations later, Harper et al. (2006) were able to show that dramatic changes in gene frequencies have occurred over time, which is indicative of substantial genetic drift, extinction or recolonisation (Slatkin, 1977). This serves to reinforce the enormous potential of museum specimens in well-represented taxa, such as butterflies, for examining the effects of population change spanning many decades.

Collections are therefore extremely useful when studying evolutionary change and anthropogenic influences over a long period of time, as they provide genetic material from historic populations against which contemporary information can be considered (Ownes and Duin, 2008; Anon, 2013).

Agriculture and Public Health

Collections are not only potential sources of information related to pests of agriculture and forestry, but also for vectors of veterinary and human diseases. Collections also house many potential natural enemies, parasitoids and predators of pests, which are accessible to researchers for study. Most parasitoid species have, in fact, been described by taxonomists using material residing in our natural history collections. Collections can also be used to help predict pest distribution from the reconstruction of invasion history, to forecast areas where crop damage or vector-borne human disease may occur, to enable research into insecticide resistance, and to develop taxonomic keys for farmers that allow them to identify pest species more easily (Ownes and Duin, 2008; Hartley et al., 2006).

Biodiversity Distribution Modeling

Most species distribution models are founded on the concept of a species niche - the environmental conditions that define the range in which a species can exist. These models can define the relationship between the presence of a species and a set of environmental factors. Such relationships can then be extrapolated to other locations based on the suitability of habitat and geographic range.

In the case of prominent arthropod-borne diseases, models can help by mapping the anticipated global range of vectors and consequently the potential areas of disease expectancy. Specimens from collections can be used to add species distribution to these models as they are analysed. Other application areas include the prediction of the impact of climate and environmental change on the distribution of organisms, and long-term conservation planning. Modeling has become an increasingly important tool for ecologists, environmental managers and planners (Clark Labs, 2014; Ownes and Duin, 2008; Sinclair et al., 2010).

Taxonomy and Genomics

Uncovering cryptic biodiversity is essential for understanding evolutionary processes and patterns of ecosystem functioning, as well as for nature conservation. European butterflies are arguably the best-studied group of invertebrates in the world. The discovery, some twenty years ago, of a cryptic species within the Wood White, Leptidea sinapis, was a significant event and, since then, these butterflies have become a model to study speciation. Cryptic species are not separable based on their external morphology but can often be distinguished by dissection of the male and / or female genitalia. In addition, genetic data also supports species level separation.

In the 1940s Williams investigated the identity of the Irish Wood White Leptidea sinapis. From looking at subtle differences between voucher specimens, he came to the conclusion that Irish examples were distinct from those found on mainland Britain and, as such, proposed that the Irish butterfly should be given the status of subspecies, which he named juvernica.

Across Europe, seven species of Leptidea have now been described: sinapis, reali, juvernica, duponcheli, amurensis, morsei and lactea. The last three are essentially Asian species but duponcheli, a butterfly of Eastern Europe and Asia Minor, is found very locally as far west as the South of France. L. sinapis appears quite widespread on the continent as well as occurring in both Britain and Ireland. In the 1970s and 1980s Réali, and later Lorković, undertook research involving dissections of sinapis. They concluded that sinapis was not a single species but was really two cryptic species. Both species looked identical to the naked eye, did not interbreed and only upon dissection of their genitalia were they found to be separable. The new species was named Leptidea reali, Réal’s Wood White.

More recent investigations of museum specimens by Spanish and Russian lepidopterists (Dincă and colleagues) have thrown further light on the identity and distributions of the Wood Whites across Europe, using techniques based on chromosome counts and DNA analysis. Their conclusions are that reali is not in fact a single species but is itself made up of two distinct species - now named reali and juvernica. They are separate entities from sinapis. Therefore, with the benefit of access to museum specimens, what was previously thought to be a single species of Wood White is, in fact, three species - sinapis, reali and juvernica (Dincă et al., 2011; Sachanowicz et al., 2011; Butterfly Ireland, 2014).

Increasingly, we are seeing taxonomies being based on, or strongly supported by, DNA sequencing research. Whilst this is primarily a laboratory-based discipline, traditional museum specimens play an important supporting function. If taxonomy is to be based on molecular data, then the identity of the organism from which the data is derived is of fundamental importance. The storage of ‘voucher’ specimens (see below) is therefore essential for the future study and revision of taxonomies (Godfrey, 2011). This is of particular importance with ‘type’ specimens.

A ‘voucher specimen’ is any specimen, usually but not always a preserved example, that serves as a basis of study and is retained as to verify and validate the associated data e.g. where, when and who caught it. 'Specimen' may mean the whole organism or a part thereof e.g. part of a plant. Vouchers are usually placed in a publicly accessible collection although, even if they are not, they remain vouchers (Animal Ethics Infolink, 2014).


British specimens of the Large Blue Maculinea arion (Mark Colvin)

Maculinea arion, the Large Blue, is a habitat specialist, like the rest of the genus Maculinea and many other members of the tribe Polyommatini (the blues). Ugelvig et al. (2011) describe the use of microsatellite markers in order to suggest that M. arion is less sensitive to genetic erosion via population bottlenecks than previously thought, and that managing clusters of high quality habitat may be key for their long-term conservation.

The ecological niche of a species can be described as the set of conditions and resources necessary for an organism to maintain a viable population (Graham et al., 2004). Ecological niche modeling (a process of predicting the distribution of a species - historic, current and future) is an important tool for conservation assessment as it allows us to predict the ‘ecological niche’ requirements of a species (Ownes and Duin, 2008). Being able to accurately forecast organisms requirements is critical in reintroduction programmes, especially those involving defined habitat specialists. Species such as the Adonis Blue, P. bellargus, and Large Blue, M. arion, are maintained by grazing disturbance: these species occupy a very confined ecological niche and they have very strict requirements concerning the vegetation structure and, for M. arion at least, the presence of the ant host species (Polus et al., 2007). Understanding these requirements and being able to accurately map suitable locations for release is essential and, in part, is possible due to the data that is housed in our collections (Gaubert et al., 2006; Johnson et al., 2011).

The British psammodiines (lesser dung beetles) are psammophilous (sand-loving) in habitat choice and often restricted in their distribution. Due to a lack of specific research on the species, their true distribution and conservation status is unclear. Brindalus porcicollis (Illiger) is one such species, which, until recently was believed to be extinct in the UK. Mann and Booth (2000) confirmed, through examining all known specimens and their data housed in UK collections, that the locality of the original collectors was a small patch of sandy beach, and not as had been published in the literature - several locations in the ‘Plymouth area’. This data also provided the authors with the times of appearance for this rare beetle. The notebooks and data from voucher specimens allowed the authors to pinpoint the exact locality and the time of year to undertake fieldwork, which consequently proved successful.

In another paper, this time by Mann and Barclay (2009), the identification and status of the two-spot pot beetle Cryptocephalus biguttatus (Scopoli) was discussed. Following confusion in the recent literature, new characters were used to separate two superficially similar species, C. biguttatus and C. bipunctatus. Through re-identification of specimens deposited as vouchers in museums and private collections, from most known localities dating back 190 years, the authors were able to verify that C. biguttatus had been over-recorded due to misidentifications. This rare beetle occurred in fewer sites than previously thought and so its conservation status was far more precarious than originally believed.

Growing concerns about declines in both managed and wild bee colonies, and the associated loss of pollination services, has increased the urgency to identify the underlying causes. By sampling pollen loads on the bodies of voucher specimens that were collected between 1870 and 1950 - prior to the onset of agricultural intensification in The Netherlands - Scheper et al. (2014) were able to evaluate the historic pollen choices of wild bees and how their populations had changed during the twentieth century. Their research enabled them to show that the fate of the bees, in part, was often linked to that of their preferred, and declining, wild plants they depended on.

Environmental Monitoring

Natural history collections are used for monitoring changes in our natural environment by analysing levels of contamination in a particular territory or region. They serve as an archive of anthropogenic impact on nature and are key components of environmental impact assessments e.g. for landscape planning. Conventional collections can be used for environmental monitoring but for a systematic monitoring programme an environmental specimen bank (an archive of representative samples which are collected at regular intervals and in an identical manner) provides a more appropriate platform for study (Ownes and Duin, 2008).

Species New to Science

Genitalia dissection - a key requirement in many areas of research (Mark Colvin)

One of our only truly endemic insects, the lesser dung beetle Psammoporus insularis (Pittino, 2006) was only recently described as a species new to science. Pittino examined over 602 specimens from most of the major European collections. However, this new species was only discovered from specimens held in the National Museum Wales, Cardiff in their British beetle collection, some of which were collected over 100 years ago. This beetle still survives today, and is widespread in Britain with a primarily northwestern distribution where it lives on sandy riverbanks and river shingle (Pittino, 2006).

Although insect species new to science are discovered regularly, new mammal species are exceedingly uncommon, and new carnivorous mammals especially so. The Olinguito, Bassaricyon neblina (Helgen, 2013), a small South American mammal, has evaded the scientific community for all of modern history. Nearly two-dozen preserved samples - mostly skulls or furs - were mislabeled in museum collections across the United States. Visits to eighteen different museum collections and the examination of roughly 95 percent of the world’s Olingo specimens (a closely related species) turned up voucher specimens that actually came from the Olinguito. Many experts still believe that many more unknown species may be hiding in scientific collections (Stromberg, 2013).

Biological Recording

A prime example of the relevance of vouchers is stated in Mann and Barclay (2009). In this instance, over-recording of the beetle C. biguttatus had occurred due to the confusion between this rare species and a colour variety of a more widespread one. The authors examined voucher specimens in numerous collections (public and private), as well as the associated paper archives, and from this resolved the identification problem and reassessed its distribution and conservation status.

Another excellent example is in the field of re-interpretation of a species as taxonomic changes occur, in part due to increased understanding of taxonomically important characters, but also through technological improvements in research methods e.g. high magnification microscopes, computer analysis and molecular techniques. This was certainly the case in the Wood White (Leptidea) butterflies (Dincă et al., 2011; Sachanowicz et al., 2011), where examination of genitalia characters and statistical analysis aided in the separation of the three cryptic species mentioned earlier.


Natural science collections underpin our understanding of the planet and the life that lives on it. Type specimens lodged in museums are what define every species known, with reference specimens providing a way for researchers to check species identifications and piece together the complex history of life and relationships between organisms. Collections provide a historical baseline for understanding past population distributions, to better understand current distributions and to predict future trends. This allows us to make sense of our changing planet and raise awareness of how we influence it (Natural Sciences Collections Association, 2014).

Our knowledge and understanding of the entomological world continues to grow and, for the most part, this is through responsible collecting, which often requires specimens to be killed and preserved. Although this is less likely, though not unnecessary with the Lepidoptera, we should not, therefore, instinctively label those brandishing a net and undertaking collecting as irresponsible. Providing collecting is carried out following well-established ethical guidelines, and undertaken to better understand and conserve our global biodiversity, then I consider collecting to be a vital tool in furthering our scientific knowledge.

The vouchers and data that researchers accumulate over the course of their lives will have scientific value long into the future. I am sure when Williams collected Wood Whites in the 1940s he would not have thought his specimens would be used for taxonomic and conservation research in the 21st Century. What would have happened if Williams had only drawn or photographed his white butterfly?

My thanks to Darren Mann, Peter Eeles, Phil Everitt, Sally-Ann Spence and Guy Padfield for subject contributions and editorial comments. Images marked OUMNH are the copyright of Oxford University Museum of Natural History.


Andersen, A., Simcox, D.J., Thomas, J.A. and Nash, D.R. (2014). Assessing reintroduction schemes by comparing genetic diversity of reintroduced and source populations: a case study of the globally threatened large blue butterfly (Maculinea arion). Biological Conservation, 175, pp. 34-41.

Animal Ethics Infolink (2014). Collection of voucher specimens [Online]. Available from: [Accessed, 10 November 2014].

Anon (2013). Executive Summary. The Role of Museums and Collections in Biological Recording. The Open Plenary Session of the Linnean Society’s Taxonomy & Systematics Committee. 18th September, 2013, Burlington House, London. The Linnean Society of London.

Anon (2014). Collections Based Research in the Genomic Era. A joint meeting of the Centre for Ecology and Evolution & the Linnean Society of London. April 2-3, 2014, Burlington House, London. The Linnean Society of London.

Bartomeus, I., Ascher, J.S., Gibbs, J., Danforth, B.N., Wagner, D.L., Hedtke, S.M. and Winfree, R. (2013). Historical changes in northeastern US bee pollinators related to shared ecological traits. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(12), pp. 4656-4660.

Biology Curators’ Group (1995). International Conference on the Value and Valuation of Natural Science Collections, The University of Manchester, April 19-21, 1995. The Biology Curator, 3.

Brooks, S.J., Self, A., Toloni, F. and Sparks, T. (2014). Natural history museum collections provide information on phenological change in British butterflies since the late-nineteenth century. International Journal of Biometeorology, 58(8), pp. 1749-1758.

Butterfly Ireland (2014). The Wood White Butterflies in Ireland [Online]. Available from: [Accessed, 18 November 2014].

Cayuela, L., Golicher, D.J., Newton, A.C., Kolb, M., de Alburquerque, F.S., Arets, E.J.M.M., Alkemade J.R.M. and Pérez, A.M. (2009). Species distribution modeling in the tropics: problems, potentialities, and the role of biological data for effective species conservation. Tropical Conservation Science, 2(3), pp. 319-352.

Clark Labs (2011). Species Distribution Modeling in IDRISI’s Land Change Modeler [Online]. Available from: [Accessed, 24 November 2014].

Cleary, D.F.R., Descimon, H. and Menken, S.B.J. (2002). Genetic and ecological differentiation between the butterfly sisterspecies Colias alfacariensis and Colias hyale. Contributions to Zoology, 71(4), pp. 131-139.

Dempster, J.P., King, M.L. and Lakhani, K.H. (1976). The status of the swallowtail butterfly in Britain. Ecological Entomology, 1, pp. 71-84.

Dincă, V., Lukhtanov, V.A., Talavera, G. and Vila, R. (2011). Unexpected layers of cryptic diversity in wood white Leptidea butterflies. Nature Communications, 2, p. 324, DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1329.

Dincă, V., Wiklund, C., Lukhtanov, V.A., Kodandaramaiah, U., Norén, K., Dapporto, L., Wahlberg, N., Vila, R. and Friberg, M. (2013). Reproductive isolation and patterns of genetic differentiation in a cryptic butterfly species complex. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 26(10), pp. 2095-2106.

Duff, A.G., Mann, D.J. and Gibbs, D.J. (2007). Onthophagus fracticornis (Preyssler) (Scarabaeidae) is alive and well in western Britain. The Coleopterist, 16(3), pp. 131-133.

Enghoff, H. and Seberg, O. (2006). A Taxonomy of Taxonomy and Taxonomists. The Systematist, 27, pp. 13-15.

Entomology Today (2014). Some Moths are Actually Butterflies According to DNA Sequencing Study [Online]. Available from: [Accessed, 14 November 2014].

Gaubert, P., Papeş, M. and Peterson, A.T. (2006). Natural history collections and the conservation of poorly known taxa: Ecological niche modeling in central African rainforest genets (Genetta spp.). Biological Conservation, 130, pp. 106-117.

Gilbert, M.T.P., Moore, W., Melchior, L. and Worobey, M. (2007). DNA Extraction from Dry Museum Beetles without Conferring External Morphological Damage. PLoS ONE, 2(3), article number e272, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000272.

Godfrey, M. (2011). Why museums matter. British Wildlife, 23(2), pp. 110-115.

Graham, C.H., Ferrier, S., Huettman, F., Moritz, C. and Peterson, A.T. (2004). New developments in museum-based informatics and applications in biodiversity analysis. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 19(9), pp. 497-503.

Greenfieldboyce, N. (2014). Is Collecting Animals For Science A Noble Mission Or A Threat? [Online]. Available from: [Accessed, 9 November 2014].

Hajibabaei, M., Janzen, D.H., Burns, J.M., Hallwachs, W., and Hebert, P.D.N. (2006). DNA barcodes distinguish species of tropical Lepidoptera. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(4), pp. 968-971.

Harper, G.L., Maclean, N. and Goulson, D. (2006). Analysis of museum specimens suggests extreme genetic drift in the Adonis blue butterfly (Polyommatus bellargus). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society of London, 88, pp. 447-452.

Hartley, C.J., Newcomb, R.D., Russell, R.J., Yong, C.G., Stevens, J.R., Yeates, D.K., La Salle, J. and Oakeshott, J.G. (2006). Amplification of DNA from preserved specimens shows blowflies were preadapted for the rapid evolution of insecticide resistance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(23), pp. 8757–8762.

Helgen, K.M., Pinto, C.M., Kays, R., Helgen, L.E., Tsuchiya, M.T.N., Quinn, A., Wilson, D.E. and Maldonado, J.E. (2013). Taxonomic revision of the olingos (Bassaricyon), with description of a new species, the Olinguito [Online]. Available from: [Accessed, 9 November 2014].

Huber, J.T. (1998). The importance of voucher specimens, with practical guidelines for preserving specimens of the major invertebrate phyla for identification. Journal of Natural History, 32, pp. 367-385.

Invertebrate Link (JCCBI) (2002). Code for insect collecting [Online]. Available from: [Accessed, 9 November 2014].

Johnson, K.G., Brooks, S.J., Fenberg, P.B., Glover, A.G., James, K.E., Lister, A.M., Michel, E., Spencer, M., Todd, J.A., Valsami-Jones, E., Young, J.R. and Stewart, J.R. (2011). Climate Change and Biosphere Response: Unlocking the Collections Vault. BioScience, 61(2), pp. 147-153.

Kageyama, M., Monk, R.R., Bradley, R.D., Edson, G.F. and Baker, R.J. (2006). The changing significance and definition of the biological voucher [Online]. Available from: [Accessed, 10 November 2014].

Kawahara, A.Y. and Breinholt, J.W. (2014). Phylogenomics provides strong evidence for relationships of butterflies and moths. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 281(1788), article number 20140970.

Landry, J.F. and Hebert, P.D.N. (2013). Plutella australiana (Lepidoptera, Plutellidae), an overlooked diamondback moth revealed by DNA barcodes. ZooKeys, 327, pp. 43-63.

Lepidoptera Dissection Group. [Accessed, 11 November 2014].

Lister, A.M. and Climate Change Research Group (2011). Natural history collections as sources of long-term datasets. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 26(4), pp. 153-154.

Mann, D.J. and Booth, R.G. (2000). Brindalus porcicollis (Illiger) (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Psammodiinae) in Britain. British Journal of Entomology and Natural History, 13, pp. 137-145.

Mann, D.J. and Barclay, M.V.L. (2009). The identification and distribution of Cryptocephalus biguttatus (Scopoli) and C. bipunctatus (Linnaeus) var. thomsoni Weise (Chrysomelidae) in Britain. The Coleopterist, 18(3), pp. 166-181.

Mares, M.A. (2009). Natural Science Collections: America’s Irreplaceable Resource. BioScience. 59(7), pp. 544-545.

Minteer, B.A., Collins, J.P., Love, K.E. and Puschendorf, R. (2014). Avoiding (Re)extinction. Science, 344, pp. 260-261, DOI: 10.1126/science.1250953.

Natural Sciences Collections Association (NatSCA). [Accessed, 14 November 2014].

Ownes, S. and Duin, D. (Eds.) (2008). Workshop report. M4.2.8a Broadening the user base of natural history collections (DRAFT). An EDIT WP4 and SYNTHESIS NAC initiative. Hosted by the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels. November 4-5, 2008.

Paine, C. (Ed.) (1992). Standards in the Museum Care of Biological Collections. Museums & Galleries Commission.

Peterson, A.T. and Vieglais, D.A. (2001). Predicting Species Invasions Using Ecological Niche Modeling: New Approaches from Bioinformatics Attack a Pressing Problem. BioScience, 51(5), pp. 363-371.

Pettitt, C. (1991). What Price Natural History Collections, or ‘Why do we need all these bloody mice?’ Museums Journal, 91(8), pp. 25-28.

Pittino, R. (2006). A revision of the genus Psammoporus Thomson, 1859 in Europe, with description of two new species (Coleoptera Scarabaeoidea: Aegialiidae). Giornale Italiano di Entomologia, 11, pp. 325-342.

Polus, E., Vandewoestijne, S., Choutt, J. and Baguette, M. (2007). Tracking the effects of one century of habitat loss and fragmentation on calcareous grassland butterfly communities. Biodiversity and Conservation, 16(12), pp. 3423-3436.

Remsen, Jr., J.V. (1993). Emotionalism is the epitaph for enlightenment. Birding, 25, pp. 129-132.

Remsen, Jr., J.V. (1995). The importance of continued collecting of bird specimens to ornithology and bird conservation. Bird Conservation International, 5, pp. 145-180.

Sachanowicz, K., Wower, A. and Buszko, J. (2011). Past and present distribution of the cryptic species Leptidea sinapis and L. reali (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) in Poland and its implications for the conservation of these butterflies. European Journal of Entomology, 108, pp. 235-242.

Scheper, J., Reemer, M., van Kats, R., Ozinga, W.A., van der Linden, G.T.J., Schaminée, J.H.J., Siepel, H. and Kleijn, D. (2014). Museum specimens reveal loss of pollen host plants as key factor driving wild bee decline in The Netherlands [Online]. Available from: [Accessed, 25 November 2014].

Sills, J., (Ed) (2014). Specimen collection: An essential tool. Science, 344(6186), pp. 814-815.

Sinclair, S.J., White, M.D. and Newell, G.R. (2010). How Useful are Species Distribution Models for Managing Biodiversity under Future Climates? [Online]. Available from: [Accessed, 24 November 2014].

Slatkin, M. (1977). Gene flow and Genetic Drift in a Species Subject to Frequent Local Extinctions. Theoretical Population Biology, 12, pp. 253-262.

Society for the Preservation of Natural History Collections (2010). Why Collections Matter [Online]. Available from: [Accessed, 5 December 2014].

Stromberg, J. (2013). For the First Time in 35 Years, A New Carnivorous Mammal Species is Discovered in the Americas [Online]. Available from: [Accessed, 9 November 2014].

Thomas, J.A. (1983). The ecology and conservation of Lysandra bellargus (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in Britain. Journal of Applied Ecology, 20, pp. 59–83.

Ugelvig, L.V., Nielsen, P.S., Boomsma, J.J. and Nash, D.R. (2011). Reconstructing eight decades of genetic variation in an isolated Danish population of the large blue butterfly Maculinea arion. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 11, article number 201.

Wandeler, P., Hoeck, P.E.A. and Keller, L.F. (2007). Back to the future: museum specimens in population genetics. TRENDS in Ecology and Evolution, 22(12), pp. 634-642.

Wheeler, T.A. (2003). The role of voucher specimens in validating faunistic and ecological research [Online]. Biological Survey of Canada (Terrestrial Arthropods), Document Series No. 9. Available from: [Accessed, 21 November 2014].

Whitlock, M.C. and McCauley, D.E. (1990). Some Population Genetic Consequences of Colony Formation and Extinction: Genetic Correlations within Founding Groups. Evolution, 44(7), pp. 1717-1724.

Winker, K., Fall, B.A., Klicka, J.T., Parmelee, D.F. and Tordoff, H.B. (1991). The Importance of Avian Collections and the Need for Continued Collecting. Loon, 63, pp. 238-246.

Winker, K. (2004). Natural History Museums in a Postbiodiversity Era. BioScience, May 2004, 54(5), pp. 455-459.

Zimmer, C. (2014). Clues to Bees’ History, Tucked Away in Drawers [Online]. Available from: [Accessed, 25 November 2014].

Saturday, 13 December 2014

Chevalier aboyeur …

Greenshank (Tringa nebularia)

Despite a lack of any strong colour or pattern T. nebularia is an elegant species and one, which is a fairly common passage migrant and scarce winter visitor to Sussex. Chichester Harbour is recorded as the most favoured site in the county, with an autumn maximum of around 100 roosting at Thorney Deeps. This is about 6% of the national total, making this one of the top six sites in the country. Considerably smaller numbers pass through other coastal wetland sites, especially Pagham Harbour and Rye Bay. T. nebularia is also regularly seen at our larger inland wetlands with groups of up to 10 being recorded at Pulborough Brooks and Weir Wood Reservoir.

A beautiful bird that is often first noted due to its triple piping call …


Barfield, C., 2014. Greenshank. The Birds of Sussex. Thetford: British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) Books on behalf of the Sussex Ornithological Society, pp. 283-284.
Smith, D., 1996. Greenshank. Birds of Sussex. Sussex Ornithological Society, pp. 285-287.

BirdLife International (2014) Species factsheet: Tringa nebularia. Downloaded from on 13th December 2014.

Tuesday, 21 October 2014

Royal command ...

Queen of Spain Fritillary (Issoria lathonia)

I. lathonia is an extremely rare immigrant and transient resident to the British Isles with the first recorded specimen coming from Gamlingay in Cambridgeshire in 1710. It was first noticed in numbers in 1818 and was seen every year until 1885 - with the highest total of 50 records in 1872. Since then, sightings are few and far between with an additional 42 records up until 1939. Between 1943 and 1950 an additional 75 records were added and, since then, there has again been a dearth of sightings with no sightings at all in some years. In 2009, 9 individuals were seen near the Sussex coast, including a sighting of a mating pair. Even so, there have been less than 400 sightings in total since it was first discovered. To date there have been just over 50 confirmed accounts from Sussex.

Although females have been seen egg-laying, neither larvae nor pupae have been found in the wild except in the Channel Islands, where larvae were found in 1950. Larvae were again found in 1951 and 1957. However, in 1945, 25 individuals were recorded at Portreath in Cornwall, suggesting that a migrant female had deposited her eggs in the vicinity and that this concentration of adults were her offspring.

The vast majority of UK sightings are from the south coast of England, with a fairly even spread from Cornwall to Kent. There are fewer records further north and several records from southern Ireland. It is believed that the presence of this species on our shores is dependent on individuals originating in northern France. Unfortunately, the number seen there is also decreasing due to loss of suitable habitat and this undoubtedly has a knock-on effect.

The sexes are similar in appearance, although the female is slightly larger, with a shorter, more rounded abdomen than that of the male and a more extended greenish hue around the basal area of the upperside wings; the black markings also tend to be more bold. The characteristic silver spots on the underside hindwings mean that this butterfly is unlikely to be confused with any other species. The four images all depict males.


Hulme, N., 2010. Queen of Spain Fritillary in West Sussex - Evidence of breeding by The Queen of Spain Fritillary butterfly (Issoria lathonia Linn.) at Chichester, West Sussex in 2009. Sussex Butterfly Report (2009). Sussex Butterfly Conservation, Issue 2, Spring 2010, pp.12-17.
Pratt, C. R., 2011. Queen of Spain Fritillary. A Complete History of the Butterflies and Moths of Sussex. Peacehaven, East Sussex: Colin R. Pratt, 2, pp. 265-267.

Friday, 17 October 2014

Urban warrior ...

Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus)

A young male Kestrel waits patiently and watches …

Like many British birds of prey, gamekeepers heavily persecuted the Kestrel during the 19th century and numbers fell dramatically. Since then numbers have fluctuated considerably; a variety of reasons for this have been suggested, but they were certainly hit hard by the use of organochlorine pesticides in agriculture in the 1950s and 60s. Kestrel numbers probably recovered to such an extent in the late 1960s and early 70s that it became Britain’s commonest bird of prey. In Sussex, the county population was estimated at 600 pairs in 1964-67, a figure that was revised to 800-1150 pairs in 1980. Numbers nationally have since fluctuated, but appear to be falling once more, with numbers down by 30% during 1995-2011 and an 18% decline in southeast England during 1995-2010.

A beautiful bird and one that evokes fond childhood memories …


Prevost, L., 2014. Kestrel. The Birds of Sussex. Thetford: British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) Books on behalf of the Sussex Ornithological Society, pp. 203-204.
Hope, C., 1996. Kestrel. Birds of Sussex. Sussex Ornithological Society, pp. 202-204.

Wednesday, 10 September 2014

Chic chicks ...

Little Egret (Egretta garzetta)

In 20 years, the Little Egret (E. garzetta) has gone from being a rare vagrant in Sussex to a regular breeding bird, present throughout the year. The first record in Sussex was in 1952, when a single vagrant was recorded at Manhood End on 10th June 1952, and nearby, on the eastern side of Chichester Harbour, from 2nd July to 1st September 1952. Thereafter, there were occasional sightings in the county, with a total of 27 birds recorded during 1953-88, mainly along the coast. E. garzetta is now a fairly common resident which has bred in Sussex since 2001. This was just five years after the first UK breeding record - recorded from Dorset in 1996.

In Britain, the Little Egret is at the northernmost limit of its range. A warmer climate is likely to lead to an increase in the breeding numbers found in Sussex, but an exceptionally cold winter will lead to a profound drop in numbers.

An elegant bird and one that is always a delight to see …


Collins, B., 1996. Little Egret. Birds of Sussex. Sussex Ornithological Society, pp. 120-121.
Watson, B., 2014. Little Egret. The Birds of Sussex. Thetford: British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) Books on behalf of the Sussex Ornithological Society, pp. 163-164.