next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects
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.
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.
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)
________________________________________
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
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 infinite variety of nature
be acquired except by close observational contact with the things
themselves."
YT, Dave Webster, Kentville
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Shaw" <srshaw@Dal.Ca>
To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2015 12:58 PM
Subject: RE: [NatureNS] Queen Bee
<snip>
> Good luck with the project, and as Dave implies, much of insect
> attractiveness is revealed visually using high power, high resolution
> images. <snip >
Steve (Hfx)
> --------------------------------------------
> Dave -
> Just a typo. Check out http://www.xerces.org/.
> Peter Payzant
> ________________________________________
> From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca [naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca] on
> behalf of Mary Macaulay [marymacaulay@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, July 4, 2015 8:06 PM
> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Queen Bee
>
> Thank you David. I completely agree!
> Yes Xerces is still around. Not big on advocacy using social media but
> very much so with doing conservation work. Mostly in the USA.
>
> With kindest regards,
>
> Mary (Macaulay), P.Eng.
> Owner
> Remember Adventures
> RememberAdventures.ca<http://RememberAdventures.ca>
> Now Open for Buggy rentals, picnics, pollinator meadow & games !!
> Main Street & Trans-Canada Trail
> Tatamagouche
> 1-902-293-1533
> Twitter @RememberAdventures & @InsectRecovery
>
>
> On Jul 4, 2015, at 11:18 AM, David & Alison Webster
> <dwebster@glinx.com<mailto:dwebster@glinx.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Mary & All, July 3, 2015
> It was good to see your advocacy of insects getting some exposure
> (Hfx.Chr.) in today's paper.
> Next time, if doing so is possible, try to steer the reporter clear of
> negativity; e.g."Most of them are downright ugly."
> Many larvae would not win any beauty pagents perhaps but mature insects
> are beautiful; more so under magnification.
> Some 20 years ago I caught wind of a society based in California that
> aimed to increase awareness about insects and change attitudes for the
> better. I thought it was xerxes something but a google of that turns up
> only Persian history. Does anyone remember the name of this society and
> whether they are still active ?
>
> Yt, Dave Webster, Kentville
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2015.0.6037 / Virus Database: 4365/10162 - Release Date: 07/04/15
>