Hubbry Logo
Insect collectingInsect collectingMain
Open search
Insect collecting
Community hub
Insect collecting
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Insect collecting
Insect collecting
Insect collecting
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Beetle collection at the Melbourne Museum, Australia

Insect collecting refers to the collection of insects and other arthropods for scientific study or as a hobby.[1] Most insects are small and the majority cannot be identified without the examination of minute morphological characters, so entomologists often make and maintain insect collections. Very large collections are preserved in natural history museums or universities where they are maintained and studied by specialists. Many college courses require students to form small collections. There are also amateur entomologists and collectors who keep collections.

Historically, insect collecting has been widespread and was in the Victorian age a very popular educational hobby. Insect collecting has left traces in European cultural history, literature and songs, e.g., Georges Brassens's La chasse aux papillons (The Hunt for Butterflies). The practice is particularly common among Japanese youths.[citation needed]

Capture and kill techniques

[edit]
Further information: Insect trap
Entomologist Clare Butcher collecting with a net and an aspirator.
An old black and white drawing of seven men in a wooded area, catching insects in various ways
1877 illustration showing a variety of collection techniques
A large circular machine sitting on an outdoor table
A Robinson light trap for collecting moths

Insects may be passively caught using traps such as funnels, pitfall traps, bottle traps, malaise traps, or flight interception traps, some of which are baited with small bits of sweet foods (such as honey). Entomologists collecting nocturnal insects (especially moths) during faunistic survey studies might utilize ultraviolet light traps such as the Robinson trap. Aspirators, sometimes called "pooters", suck up insects too small or delicate to handle with fingers.[2]

Active capture of insects often involves using nets. Aerial insect nets are used to collect flying insects. The bag of a butterfly net is generally constructed from a lightweight mesh to minimize damage to delicate butterfly wings. Sweep nets are more rugged, and used to collect insects from grass and brush. A sweep net is swept back and forth through vegetation quickly turning the opening from side to side and following a shallow figure eight pattern. The collector walks forward while sweeping, and the net is moved through plants and grasses with force. Sweeping continues for some distance and then the net is flipped over, with the bag hanging over the rim, trapping the insects until they can be removed. Other types of nets used for collecting insects include beating nets and aquatic nets.[3] Leaf litter sieves are used by coleopterists and to collect larvae.

Once collected, insects must be killed before they damage themselves trying to escape. Killing jars are used on hard-bodied insects. Soft-bodied insects, such as those in the larval stage, are generally fixed in a vial containing an ethanol and water solution.[4]

Storage and curation

[edit]
Equipment for preparation
Insect pinning label order diagram

There are several different preservation methods that are used; some of which include: dried preservation (pinning), liquid preservation, or slide mounts. Another (now mostly historical) approach is caterpillar inflation, where the innards were removed and the skin dried.[5] Pinning is by far the most common form of insect preservation.[1]

It is better to pin an insect that has died recently enough that it has not dried yet, because it allows the thoracic muscles to adhere to the pin. Previously dried specimens must have glue applied to the pin location to avoid spinning. The large majority of the time insects are pinned vertically through their mesothorax and slightly off-center to the right of the mid-line.[6] The pin should sit with 1/4 of the pin above the insect as to allow enough room for labels to be readable underneath.

When pinning insects with wings, it is important to display them properly: Lepidoptera wings should always be spread. When drying insects with wings such as butterflies, setting paper is used to position the wings.

Orthopteroids often have their left wings spread. In scientific collections, the insect's wings, legs, and antenna are tucked underneath it to conserve space.

When point-mounting small insects the insect is glued to a small piece of non acidic, triangle paper. When drying an insect the relaxed insect is spread out accordingly using pins on a foam block where it can dry and retain its positioning.

When labeling insects the labels are presented in this order top down: Locality, additional locality/voucher label/accession numbers, insect identification.[7]

Insect pins

[edit]
Main article: Insect pins
Part of a beetle collection. The insects are fixed in place by entomological pins which allow handling and which also pierce the data label
A hoverfly double-mounted with a minuten pin and a size 3 pin

Insect pins are used by entomologists for mounting insect specimens.[1]

As standard, they are 38 millimetres (1.5 in) long and come in sizes from 000 (the smallest diameter), through 00, 0, and 1, to 8 (the largest diameter).[8][9][10] The most generally useful size in entomology is size 2, which is 0.46 millimetres (0.018 in) in diameter, with sizes 1 and 3 being the next most useful.[8][9]

They were once commonly made from brass or silver, but these would corrode from contact with insect bodies and are no longer commonly used.[8] Instead they are nickel-plated brass, yielding "white" or "black" enamelling, or even made from stainless steel.[9] Similarly, the smallest sizes from 000 to 1 used to be impractical for mounting until plastic and polyethylene became commonly used for pinning bases.[8]

There are also micropins, which are 10–15 millimetres (0.39–0.59 in) long.[9] minutens are headless micropins that are generally only made of stainless steel, used for double-mounting, where the insect is mounted on the minuten, which is pinned to a small block of soft material, which is in turn mounted on a standard, larger, insect pin.[11][12]

Pinning of entomological specimens

[edit]
Directly-pinned Diptera. Though most of these specimens are at the correct height, some have been pinned incorrectly by placing the pin on the centre line, damaging characters on both sides of the thorax.
Setting boards
  • Entomological pins. Continental pins, so called for historical reasons, are used internationally by museums and collectors. They are made of stainless steel for preference, especially for very long-term storage of specimens, but blackened steel also is used. The pins have round plastic or solid metal heads. Continental pins are of a standard length (40mm), but they are available in thicknesses numbered 000 (the thinnest), 00, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (the thickest). This standard pin length is sufficient to accommodate an adequate number of data labels and to permit convenient handling with suitably curved forceps or tweezers, referred to as 'entomological forceps'.[13]

As an exception to this standard, there also are pins of size 7, extra-long and very strong pins for very large beetles; they are 52mm long and thicker than size 6 pins.

  • Direct pinning. Direct pinning is the insertion of an entomological pin directly through the thorax of a specimen. The insects are pinned vertically through the thorax with a suitably sized pin, but by convention they are not pinned on the midline, but to the right, so as to leave at least one side undamaged.[14]
  • Point. A point is a triangular piece of white card. Specially designed point punches permit the production of large numbers of points of standard sizes as required. To use a point, a pin is inserted through the broad base of the triangle. To mount the specimen, a tiny amount of glue is placed on the tip and applied to the right side of the insect's thorax.[14] If appropriate the tip of the point may be bent at the necessary angle to hold the body of the specimen horizontal when the pin is vertical, with the long axis of the insect at right angles to the point.
Sciapus nervosus glued to a card point
Diptera mounted on card points
  • Minuten pins. Insect pins without heads, 12mm long. They are used for double mounting (staging) very small insects. They also may be used profitably for staging insects of moderate size, where they have the advantage of being less damaging to the specimen. For best effect in that respect, the pin is inserted from below through the staging card, well into the thorax, but not all the way through. Alternatively the minuten pin can be inserted laterally into one side of the thorax, again preferably not all the way through.
  • Carding. Insects (especially Coleoptera and Hemiptera) are glued to rectangular pieces of acid free card or Bristol board providing a stage. Typical sizes are 4.5 x 11 mm;5 x 14 mm;6 x 17 mm;10 x 21 mm;13 x 30 mm. Printed lines allow uniform placement of the entomological pin. Though this is convenient, it is dubious practice at best, because it obscures features that might be necessary for taxonomic or morphological studies. In any case, at the very least the glue should be sufficiently conveniently soluble to be removed with solvents when necessary. With such considerations in mind, Canada balsam is about as good an adhesive as any.
A carded bug
  • Staging. When specimens are mounted on a smaller support which in turn is supported on a normal full-sized entomological pin, this is called staging. For example a specimen might be mounted on a minuten pin, typically being pinned on its side (lateral pinning) or upright (direct pinning) with the minuten pin driven into a stage, a strip of suitable material such as dried plant pith or plastic foam supported in a horizontal position on the main entomological pin; as a rule a number 3 pin is convenient. Other forms of stage include card mounts and point mounts.
The stage usually is positioned at such a distance up the vertical stage-pin, as to put the specimen at the same height as a directly pinned insect; this normally allows room for labels beneath and to allow handling of the specimen without damage.
If insects are side-pinned by pins that pass right through the specimens, then the minuten should be at such an angle that different features are damaged on the opposite sides of the thorax. Competent staging protects small specimens and displays most features conveniently. The stage-pin then is easy to manipulate when moving the specimen and the stage absorbs vibrations.
[edit]

Pokémon creator Satoshi Tajiri's childhood hobby of insect collecting is the inspiration behind the popular video game series.[15]

A beetle collection becomes a source of fascination for a mentally disturbed woman in Chapter XI of MacKinlay Kantor's Pulitzer Prize-winning novel Andersonville (1955).

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Insect collecting

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Insect collecting is the systematic capture, preservation, and curation of and other arthropods for , , or recreational purposes. This practice involves diverse techniques to obtain specimens, including active methods like netting, hand-picking, and beating vegetation, as well as passive approaches such as pitfall traps and light attractants. Once captured, insects are typically killed using agents like or freezing, then preserved through pinning, slide mounting, or immersion in to maintain their structure for long-term analysis. Essential tools include aerial nets, aspirators, killing jars, and storage boxes, with meticulous labeling of collection data—such as date, location, and —ensuring the specimens' scientific value. The history of insect collecting traces back to antiquity, where in the 4th century BCE developed early classifications based on anatomical features like mouthparts and wings, laying foundational principles for . In the 16th century, during the , collecting became a symbol of scholarly prestige, integrated into Wunderkammern or , with naturalists like Conrad Gesner documenting observations in his multi-volume Historia Animalum (1551–1587). The marked a pivotal advancement when introduced in (1735), enabling standardized taxonomic identification of . By the 19th century, professional entomological societies emerged, such as the Société Entomologique de (1832) and the Royal Entomological Society of (1833), while utilized insect specimens to gather evidence supporting his theory of evolution by . In the , methods evolved with innovations like by Willi Hennig, and collections shifted toward public education through exhibits. Insect collecting plays a crucial role in advancing entomological research and societal benefits, serving as a for documentation and ecological monitoring. Collections enable the discovery of new , tracking of —including arthropods—that inflict an estimated $120 billion in annual economic damage alone, and identification of disease vectors like mosquitoes responsible for and dengue. They support agricultural by studying native pollinators, such as bumblebees, that collectively contribute an estimated $3 billion yearly to U.S. crop production through of crops like blueberries, , and tomatoes. Furthermore, preserved specimens provide historical baselines for assessing impacts, including declines and shifts in distributions due to alteration. Beyond , collecting fosters educational engagement, inspiring future entomologists and promoting awareness of insects' ecological significance in food webs and .

History and Overview

Origins and Early Practices

Insect collecting traces its roots to ancient civilizations, where naturalists began systematically observing and documenting insects as part of broader inquiries into the natural world. In the 4th century BCE, , in works such as and Generation of Animals, described insect anatomies, behaviors, and life cycles, including observations on and , driven by philosophical curiosity about life's diversity. Similarly, the Roman author , in his 1st-century CE Natural History, cataloged numerous insect species, detailing their habits, economic impacts, and potential medicinal applications, such as using spider webs for or beetles in remedies, reflecting a blend of empirical observation and practical utility. These early efforts were motivated by scientific curiosity to understand nature's order, alongside medicinal interests, as insects were valued for their perceived therapeutic properties in ancient . During the medieval period, insect documentation waned amid scholastic focus on classical texts, but the Renaissance revived and expanded these practices through illustrated compendia and private collections. Italian naturalist Ulisse Aldrovandi (1522–1605) compiled extensive 16th-century catalogs, such as De Animalibus Insectis (published posthumously in 1602), featuring detailed woodcut illustrations of insects drawn from live specimens, emphasizing artistic representation to convey morphological accuracy and aesthetic wonder. Aldrovandi's work contributed to the burgeoning tradition of cabinets of curiosities (Wunderkammern) across Europe, where affluent scholars and nobles amassed insect specimens alongside other naturalia to symbolize intellectual mastery over the cosmos and stimulate philosophical discourse. These collections, prevalent in 16th- and 17th-century Italy, Germany, and England, were fueled by Renaissance humanism's drive for empirical knowledge and artistic emulation of divine creation, often integrating insects into emblematic displays that highlighted their symbolic roles in moral and medicinal contexts. Early exploratory collecting gained momentum during colonial expeditions of the late 17th and early 18th centuries, as European naturalists ventured abroad to document exotic species. A seminal example is the work of Maria Sibylla Merian (1647–1717), who in 1699 traveled to Surinam and collected insects firsthand, observing their life stages in their native habitats; her 1705 publication Metamorphosis Insectorum Surinamensium presented vibrant engravings of tropical insects with host plants, motivated by artistic innovation in depicting metamorphosis and scientific ambition to challenge European misconceptions about "New World" fauna. Such endeavors underscored motivations of exploratory curiosity to map global biodiversity, alongside artistic pursuits to create visually compelling records that served educational and medicinal purposes, as Merian's illustrations informed studies on insect-derived dyes and remedies. By the late 18th century, these practices laid groundwork for the more systematic tools and methodologies that emerged in the 19th century.

Modern Developments

The publication of Carl Linnaeus's in its 10th edition in 1758 marked a pivotal shift toward systematic insect collecting by introducing , which provided a standardized framework for naming and classifying species, thereby encouraging organized taxonomic efforts worldwide. This system facilitated the accumulation of species descriptions, with Linnaeus himself initially classifying 24 species of scale insects, laying the groundwork for subsequent entomological research that emphasized precise identification and documentation over mere curiosity-driven gathering. The binomial approach transformed insect collecting from an pursuit into a scientific endeavor, promoting the creation of reference collections essential for advancing . In the , the establishment of dedicated entomological societies further institutionalized collecting practices. The Entomological Society of London, founded in 1833, became a key hub for collaboration among naturalists, including early members like and , and published transactions that disseminated research findings and standardized methodologies. This society elevated entomology's professional status, supporting taxonomic studies and ecological observations that expanded knowledge of insect diversity. Professional entomologists like Jean-Henri Fabre also contributed significantly; through his detailed field observations of insect behavior in natural habitats, as chronicled in his multi-volume Souvenirs Entomologiques (published from 1879 to 1907), Fabre advanced ethological approaches, influencing the shift toward studying live insects alongside preserved specimens. These developments coincided with the refinement of specimen preparation techniques, including standardized pinning methods that emerged in the early to ensure uniform display and preservation of collections, allowing for easier comparison and long-term storage. The 20th century brought technological innovations that reshaped insect collecting. Advancements in , particularly the introduction of the in the mid-20th century, enabled detailed examination of at the ultrastructural level, revealing intricate anatomical features previously invisible and enhancing taxonomic precision. similarly transformed documentation; by the early 20th century, macro and field photography began supplementing traditional illustrations, allowing for non-destructive of specimens and behaviors, which democratized access to visual records for . Global expeditions proliferated during this era, with entomologists like James Needham and Henry Dietrich traveling via steamships, automobiles, and aircraft to remote regions such as sites and Pacific islands, amassing specimens that documented in now-altered ecosystems. The World Wars influenced these efforts profoundly; World War I spurred insecticide development from research, redirecting collecting toward pest vector studies, while World War II saw entomologists apply collections data to combat and through deployment, blending scientific pursuits with military needs. Entering the 21st century, insect collecting has increasingly supported large-scale biodiversity surveys, integrating traditional trapping with molecular techniques like DNA metabarcoding. Methods such as Malaise and SLAM traps, deployed across continents, capture bulk samples for high-throughput sequencing of genes like COI and 18S, yielding thousands of operational taxonomic units and complementing environmental DNA analyses to assess ecosystem health more comprehensively. These surveys, often non-destructive, have revealed shifts in insect populations amid global change, underscoring collecting's role in conservation monitoring.

Capture Techniques

Active Collection Methods

Active collection methods involve direct, hands-on pursuit of insects in their natural habitats, allowing collectors to target specific species and behaviors through physical interaction and immediate capture. These techniques emphasize mobility, precision, and to the insect's activity patterns, contrasting with automated sampling by requiring the collector's active presence in the field. Common tools include nets and manual devices designed for various environments, enabling efficient capture of both flying and perched specimens. Aerial nets are lightweight implements used to ensnare flying such as and dragonflies mid-flight, typically featuring a handle 105-140 cm long and a fine-mesh bag made of durable materials like , , or Dacron to minimize damage while ensuring flexibility. Sweep nets, a variant for vegetation-dwelling , consist of stronger bags dragged through foliage to dislodge and capture hidden species like beetles and hemipterans from grasses or shrubs. nets, often deployed as vertical barriers, intercept low-flying and funnel them into collection containers, particularly effective for dipterans and hymenopterans in open areas. Aquatic nets, adapted for water habitats, employ metal screening or fine / meshes to scoop larvae and adults from streams and ponds without disrupting the substrate. Hand collection tools facilitate precise capture of small or delicate directly from surfaces. , fine and lightweight, allow gentle grasping behind the insect's head or to avoid injury, ideal for perched specimens on bark or flowers. Aspirators, commonly known as pooters, use via a (2.5-5 cm , 12 cm long) connected to glass or with a fine filter, enabling safe aspiration of tiny like from leaves without physical contact. Beating sheets, typically a 1 m square white cloth spread beneath branches, collect dislodged by tapping vegetation with a stick, proving especially useful for larval lepidopterans, beetles, and true bugs that drop when disturbed. Night collecting targets nocturnal species like moths and beetles using portable light sources to attract and immobilize them. UV lamps, such as 15-watt fluorescent tubes, or illuminate a white sheet or vertical surface, drawing toward the collector for hand-netting or aspiration during peak activity. Best practices for active collection prioritize timing aligned with insect behavior, such as dawn or dusk when many exhibit heightened activity, including swarming mayflies or emerging moths, to maximize encounters while minimizing escape. Habitat-specific strategies enhance yields; for instance, sweep netting in dense undergrowth targets foliage-dwellers, while aquatic nets in flowing water capture insects without excessive disturbance. Collectors often time sweeps or beats for early morning or late afternoon in forested areas to coincide with peaks. After capture, specimens are promptly transferred to killing jars for preservation.

Passive Trapping Methods

Passive trapping methods involve the deployment of devices that capture insects through attraction, interception, or accidental encounter over extended periods, without requiring continuous human supervision. These techniques are particularly valuable for sampling diverse insect communities in natural habitats, allowing collectors to gather specimens from remote or expansive areas efficiently. Pitfall traps consist of containers, such as plastic cups or jars, buried flush with the ground surface to intercept wandering arthropods. The trap is typically filled with a preservative solution like soapy water or propylene glycol to drown and preserve captured specimens, and a rain cover may be added to prevent overflow while permitting insect entry. These traps are commonly placed in grids within soil, leaf litter, or grassy areas to target ground-dwelling insects, including beetles, ants, and spiders. Baited traps employ attractants to draw specific insect groups into collection chambers. For instance, fermenting fruit mixtures, such as mashed bananas or yeast-sugar solutions, are used in bottle or jar traps to capture fruit flies (Drosophilidae), where the volatile fermentation odors mimic ripening produce. Pheromone-baited traps, like delta or traps, release synthetic pheromones to lure male moths, aiding in population monitoring for species such as the . The Lindgren funnel trap, a multi-tiered system suspended from trees, is designed for bark beetles and mimics the silhouette of a host tree; it can be enhanced with pheromones or to increase captures of wood-boring species like Dendroctonus spp. Sticky traps feature adhesive-coated surfaces, often on cards or plates in yellow, blue, or white colors to visually attract insects, capturing them upon contact for flying or crawling pests like aphids and thrips. Pan traps, also known as bowl or Moericke traps, use shallow, colored bowls (typically yellow, blue, or white) filled with propylene glycol or soapy water and placed at ground level or on elevated platforms to intercept low-flying insects such as bees, flies, and wasps attracted to the color. These are deployed in arrays for standardized sampling in agricultural or ecological surveys. Recent advancements as of 2025 include automated detection traps that use sensors and AI for real-time identification and solar-powered traps, such as LED-based systems for nocturnal , enhancing and reducing environmental impact in remote monitoring. Passive trapping excels in providing quantitative data for assessments, as traps can operate unattended for days or weeks, yielding relative abundance estimates and revealing rare or nocturnal that evade active methods. For example, traps have been shown to detect ground diversity with high in temperate forests, supporting long-term ecological monitoring. However, these methods often result in significant by-catch of non-target , including beneficial or vertebrates, which complicates sorting and may bias samples toward mobile taxa while underrepresenting less active ones.

Killing and Initial Preservation

Humane Killing Approaches

Humane killing approaches in insect collecting prioritize methods that induce rapid unconsciousness and death to minimize potential suffering, guided by principles of that account for insects' (CNS) structure and limited but emerging evidence of . These methods aim for instantaneous CNS shutdown or prior to lethality, as prolonged stress can occur if neural function persists, based on studies showing that chill coma in insects involves spreading leading to CNS arrest. Insect welfare guidelines endorse ethical collection practices that align with such welfare standards, emphasizing non-toxic dispatch for scientific specimens. As of 2025, recent studies emphasize transparent reporting of methods and prefer prior to killing to address debates on insect . Freezing is a widely recommended non-chemical method for humane killing, particularly suitable for delicate species like butterflies and moths, where exposure to -20°C for 24 hours ensures death without structural damage. Gradual cooling in a household freezer induces chill coma in minutes to hours via metabolic slowdown and CNS suppression, potentially causing distress before coma; rapid immersion in liquid nitrogen is preferred for larger specimens to enhance rapidity and humane effect, followed by confirmation of death after 10-30 minutes of immobility though extended exposure ensures irreversibility. This approach avoids the distress associated with slower methods, as insects enter a reversible chill coma state before irreversible shutdown, making it ideal for field-collected samples prior to preservation. Mechanical methods, such as crushing or , provide instantaneous death for larger insects like beetles or orthopterans and are endorsed by welfare guidelines for their direct disruption of the CNS. Insect welfare guidelines support these techniques when performed skillfully with tools like to ensure complete and immediate neural cessation, minimizing any potential nociceptive response. For example, severs the from the body, halting all in under a second, though it requires precision to avoid incomplete kills that could prolong stress. Inert gas euthanasia using (CO₂) or in controlled chambers offers a scalable option for batch killing, inducing hypoxia and rapid without physical trauma. Gradual displacement to 70-100% CO₂ concentration or <2% oxygen with leads to CNS depression in seconds, with death confirmed after 10 minutes of exposure, suitable for laboratory or home setups in collecting workflows. These gases align with neurobiological principles by avoiding irritants that could trigger aversion behaviors, though monitoring for signs of distress is advised, and they serve as adjuncts to chemical alternatives in field scenarios.

Chemical and Physical Killing Methods

Chemical killing methods for insects typically involve the use of volatile fumigants or immersion agents that induce rapid death through respiratory or cellular disruption, allowing for subsequent preservation without excessive specimen distortion. Among these, ethyl acetate remains a preferred agent due to its balance of efficacy and relative safety compared to more hazardous alternatives. Ethyl acetate functions via vapor inhalation in killing jars, where the fumes act as a fast-acting that depresses the insect's , leading to immobilization and eventual death through asphyxiation and metabolic inhibition. To prepare a , of or absorbent material is saturated with the liquid, which evaporates to release the vapor; specimens are then exposed for 10-15 minutes until motionless, though larger may require up to 30 minutes for complete lethality. This method keeps specimens relaxed and flexible for hours to days post-killing, facilitating mounting, but overexposure can cause slight discoloration. precautions include using the agent in well-ventilated areas, avoiding open flames due to its flammability, and storing it away from children, as prolonged inhalation can irritate eyes and respiratory tracts. Other chemical agents include potassium cyanide, historically embedded in killing jar bases to release hydrogen cyanide gas, which blocks cellular respiration for near-instantaneous death within minutes. Widely adopted in the 19th century for its speed and specimen relaxation, cyanide's extreme toxicity—lethal to humans via inhalation or ingestion—has led to severe restrictions and near-abandonment in modern practice, with alternatives mandated in educational and amateur settings. For soft-bodied insects like larvae or aphids, direct immersion in 70-95% ethanol (ethyl alcohol) denatures proteins and dehydrates tissues, achieving killing within minutes to hours depending on size, while preserving morphology for study. Ethanol is preferred over isopropanol for its slower dehydration rate, reducing brittleness, though concentrations above 85% should be avoided for delicate specimens to prevent distortion. Flammability necessitates storage in sealed vials away from heat sources. Physical methods provide non-toxic alternatives, relying on to denature proteins and cause rapid cellular rupture. Hot water immersion, particularly for aquatic or larval stages, involves submerging specimens in boiling water for 1-5 minutes to fix tissues and prevent post-mortem blackening, ensuring structural integrity for pinning or . This technique is especially effective for soft-bodied forms, killing via without chemicals, though care must be taken to avoid overcooking, which can shrivel specimens. exposure offers another rapid option, heating internal fluids to lethal temperatures (above 50°C) in seconds to minutes at 2450 MHz, suitable for small batches of dry to avoid vapor buildup. However, uneven heating risks specimen damage, and it is best for disinfestation rather than routine collection. The shift from cyanide-dominated methods in the to safer options like emerged in the late 1800s, driven by growing awareness of cyanide's hazards and regulatory pressures on toxic substances, promoting ventilation and alternatives in entomological practice. While these methods prioritize efficiency, selection should consider ethical implications for minimizing suffering alongside safety.

Tools and Mounting

Essential Equipment

Insect collecting requires a range of specialized tools to effectively capture, handle, and specimens while minimizing damage. Core includes nets for active pursuit, containers for secure transport, field kits for on-site assessment, and accessories for precise manipulation. These items are selected based on the target groups and environmental conditions, ensuring ethical and efficient collection practices. Nets and bags form the foundation of active collection methods, with types tailored to specific habitats and behaviors. Aerial nets, lightweight and designed for flying insects like and dragonflies, feature a hoop of 38-45 cm in diameter attached to a 90-120 cm handle, while sweeping nets for vegetation use sturdier construction to withstand foliage contact. Aquatic nets incorporate D-shaped rims and heavy scrim or metal screening for and sampling. Materials commonly include or dacron for and , with sizes of 0.5-1 mm to retain small specimens without excessive resistance. Bags are typically cone-shaped, twice the hoop's , and sewn with a or denim band for reinforcement. Maintenance involves thorough drying after use to prevent mold, regular cleaning to remove debris, and repairs to tears, particularly after exposure to rough vegetation. Containers enable safe transport of captured , preventing escape or injury during fieldwork. Glassine envelopes, made of translucent, grease-resistant paper, are ideal for delicate winged such as and moths, allowing airflow while protecting structures like wings. Vials, often 10-30 ml in capacity with stoppers, filled with 70-80% (sometimes with 5% glacial acetic acid), suit small or soft-bodied specimens for short-term preservation and transport; cork stoppers are avoided due to potential leaching. These containers are carried in padded field bags to cushion against impacts. Field kits support accurate documentation and initial examination in the field. Hand lenses with 10x provide close-up views of morphological details, essential for preliminary identification. GPS devices record precise collection localities, including coordinates and , to enable future verification. Weatherproof cases, such as hard-shell backpacks or pelican-style boxes, protect gear from rain, dust, and rough handling during expeditions. A and pen complement these for logging habitat notes and timestamps. Accessories facilitate gentle handling and initial processing. , available in sizes like #2 (fine-tipped, 10-12 cm long) for small , allow precise picking without compression damage; soft, non-serrated tips are preferred for delicate . Killing jars consist of wide-mouthed containers with a 2.5 cm plaster of base to absorb and release vapors from agents like , enabling quick dispatch during collection; the base is recharged as needed for consistent efficacy. These tools prepare specimens for subsequent pinning without compromising integrity.

Pinning and Mounting Procedures

Pinning and mounting involves securing specimens to pins or other substrates immediately after killing to maintain their shape and structure for study and display. This process requires precision to preserve morphological features essential for identification, such as wings, antennae, and genitalia. Entomological pins, distinct from ordinary sewing pins due to their enameled or construction that resists and damage, are the standard tool for direct mounting. These pins are typically 38 mm long and sized from #000 (finest, 0.25 mm diameter) to #7 (coarsest, 1.00 mm diameter), with #2 (0.46 mm) and #3 (0.55 mm) being most commonly used for medium to large to provide adequate support without excessive penetration. Smaller sizes like #000 or #0 are reserved for minute in double-mounting setups, while larger pins (#4–#5) suit heavy-bodied specimens such as large beetles.
Pin SizeDiameter (mm)Typical Use
#0000.25Very small insects (e.g., minute ) in point mounts
#0–#10.30–0.37Small flies or wasps
#20.46General medium insects (e.g., , beetles)
#30.55Larger specimens (e.g., moths, grasshoppers)
#4–#50.64–0.70Heavy beetles or dragonflies
Pins facilitate labeling by allowing tags—small paper rectangles with collection data—to be impaled below the specimen at standardized heights, typically 10–13 mm from the 's underside to ensure visibility without obscuring the body. A pinning block, a slotted wooden or tool with graduated notches, is used to set these heights precisely: the at the top notch, the locality label in the middle, and the identification label at the bottom. Standard pinning techniques position the pin through the to balance the specimen and expose key features, always slightly right of the midline to mimic natural posture and avoid symmetry disruption. For (butterflies and moths), the pin enters the center of the mesothorax between the forewing bases, followed by wing spreading on a grooved board where wings are extended at 90–100 degrees to the body using fine strips of paper and setting pins (#00 or #000) to secure veins and scales. In Coleoptera (beetles), the pin is inserted through the right near its base or the right side of the , with the right wing cover positioned parallel to the body to display elytral patterns without spreading. For other orders like or Diptera, placement is between the forewing bases on the ; appendages such as legs and antennae are gently adjusted with to a natural spread, often using temporary brace pins or card supports to prevent collapse during drying. Alternative mounting methods accommodate small, soft-bodied, or microscopic specimens unsuitable for direct pinning. Point mounting involves gluing the insect's right side to a small triangle of acid-free cardstock (e.g., 20-pound stock) using minimal or , then attaching the point to a larger pin (#2 or #3) via a minuten pin or directly. This technique is ideal for under 6–7 mm, such as tiny wasps, ensuring the specimen tilts at a 45-degree angle for viewing. Slide preparation for entails dissecting parts like wings, genitalia, or mouthparts, clearing them in solutions like , and mounting in media such as or Euparal on glass slides under a cover slip, particularly for Diptera or larval studies. Best practices emphasize gentle handling to avoid damaging delicate structures like setae (hairs) or genitalia, which are critical for ; pins should penetrate no more than one-third through the body, and must grasp only non-vital areas. Specimens are allowed to dry in a relaxed, humid chamber (8–24 hours) if stiff, then positioned for 7–14 days in a dust-free environment to set appendages firmly, with larger or soft-bodied requiring up to two weeks to prevent sagging or mold. Post-drying, temporary supports are removed, and specimens are checked for distortions before transfer to storage.

Curation and Long-Term Storage

Labeling and Documentation

Labeling and documentation are essential practices in insect collecting to ensure the scientific value and traceability of specimens, allowing researchers to verify collection contexts and track over time. Standard label components include the locality, typically formatted with the country, state or province, county or equivalent administrative unit, and a precise description of the site, often supplemented by GPS coordinates in for geospatial accuracy. The collection date, recorded in a consistent format such as day-month-year, the name of the collector, and notes on or environmental conditions (e.g., vegetation type or microhabitat) must also be included to provide comprehensive metadata. These elements are traditionally printed or handwritten on acid-free, archival-quality to prevent degradation, with heavy (at least 20-pound ) ensuring when pinned beneath the specimen. Printed labels are generally preferred over handwritten ones for their legibility, uniformity, and resistance to fading, using small fonts (e.g., 4-point for pinned specimens) generated via printers on consistent sizes no wider than 0.7 inches. Handwritten labels, when used, require fine-point, permanent black to maintain , though they are less ideal for large collections due to potential inconsistencies. labels, a separate component, specify the taxonomic identification, including the scientific name with , the identifier's name, and the date of determination (e.g., "identified by J. Smith, 2020"), positioned below the primary data label to document revisions in classification. These standards align with protocols from entomological museums, emphasizing error-free transcription and parallel orientation to the specimen for efficient storage integration. For digital records, the Darwin Core protocol standardizes metadata sharing, using terms such as decimalLatitude and decimalLongitude for coordinates, eventDate for collection timing, recordedBy for the collector, habitat for environmental descriptions, and identifiedBy with dateIdentified for taxonomic determinations. This TDWG-maintained framework enables interoperability across databases, facilitating uploads of specimen data. Tools like the app support initial logging of observations, including photos of specimens with associated locality, date, and habitat notes, while the (GBIF) serves as a repository for digitized records, promoting global access to verified occurrence data.

Storage and Display Techniques

Storage and display techniques for insect specimens emphasize protection from environmental degradation, physical damage, and biological threats to ensure long-term accessibility for study and . Mounted are typically housed in specialized drawers and cabinets designed to maintain structural integrity and prevent . These include standard entomological drawers, such as those in U.S. National Museum or Cornell sizes, lined with cork, polyethylene foam, or balsa wood to securely hold pins vertically. Drawers are placed within sealed wooden or metal cabinets to create a barrier against , , and pests, with unit-tray systems allowing modular organization for larger collections. Pest-proofing involves airtight seals and historical use of fumigants like flakes placed in cloth bags or pillboxes within cabinets, though modern practices increasingly favor non-toxic alternatives due to health concerns. Environmental controls are essential to minimize deterioration, with recommended conditions of 30-50% relative and 18-22°C to balance specimen stability and prevent or expansion. Low reduces mold risk, while stable s inhibit microbial growth and pest activity; deviations, such as excess , can lead to of pins or labels. For displays, UV is critical, achieved through indirect or UV-filtering glass in cases to avoid color fading in pigments like those in . Storage areas should be dark and well-ventilated, with dehumidifiers used in humid climates to maintain these parameters. Archival methods extend preservation for unmounted or supplementary specimens, including Schaum boxes—foam-lined containers—for temporary dry storage of loose insects or those in envelopes. display cases often incorporate inert gases like to create oxygen-free environments, slowing oxidation and microbial decay in sensitive specimens. These methods integrate with labeling by positioning archival labels (e.g., on linen ledger paper) directly beneath specimens in trays for easy reference during storage. Common issues in storage and display include mold growth, pest infestations, and pigment fading, each requiring proactive prevention. Mold, often triggered by trapped moisture, is mitigated by using salt solutions or fumigants like in humid conditions and ensuring drawers are not fully airtight for fresh specimens. Pests such as carpet beetles, which feed on in dried , are controlled through sealed storage, periodic freezing at -20°C to -25°C for 2-5 days, and vigilant inspections. Fading from light exposure is prevented by dark storage and clove oil applications during mounting to stabilize colors. Regular monitoring and protocols help sustain collection quality over decades.

Identification and Classification

Field Identification Basics

Field identification of insects involves rapid, on-site assessment using observable external features and behaviors to classify specimens at the order or level, essential for collectors to sort catches without immediate laboratory access. This process relies on key morphological characteristics that distinguish major insect groups, allowing enthusiasts and researchers to make preliminary determinations in diverse environments such as forests, fields, or urban areas. Accurate field identification enhances collection by enabling quick decisions on whether to capture, release, or further document a specimen, though it is inherently limited by variability in species and environmental conditions. Central to field identification are morphological traits like antennal types, wing venation, and body segmentation, which provide reliable indicators for major orders. For instance, filiform antennae—thread-like and segmented—are common in orders such as (grasshoppers and crickets) and (true bugs), while clubbed antennae, thickened at the tip, are characteristic of butterflies and moths in the order . Wing venation, the pattern of veins on wings, is particularly diagnostic; dragonflies () exhibit a dense, net-like venation, whereas beetles (Coleoptera) are identified by their hardened forewings called elytra that cover the membranous hindwings. Body segmentation also aids differentiation, with insects in the order (bees, wasps, ants) showing a constricted "" between the and abdomen, contrasting with the more uniform segmentation in cockroaches (). These traits are illustrated in standard field guides, emphasizing visual cues over . Pictorial keys and field manuals are indispensable tools for applying these traits, offering dichotomous or illustrated pathways to identification. The seminal guide A Field Guide to the Insects: North America North of Mexico by Donald J. Borror and E. (1970, revised editions) provides color plates and keys focusing on common indicators like elytra for Coleoptera or (club-like balancing organs) for Diptera (flies), enabling users to navigate from broad orders to family-level possibilities through sequential comparisons. Similar resources, such as the Peterson Field Guide series, prioritize these visual and structural features for quick reference during collecting expeditions. Collectors are advised to use magnification aids like hand lenses (10x-20x) to examine fine details such as tarsal claws or mouthpart types in the field. In recent years, apps and AI-based image recognition tools have emerged as aids for field identification, achieving over 96% accuracy for agriculturally and ecologically relevant species, including pollinators and pests. These tools complement traditional methods by analyzing against databases, facilitating faster preliminary identifications during expeditions. Behavioral cues complement morphological examination by providing dynamic identifiers for initial sorting, particularly when physical traits are obscured by or life stage. Sound production, such as the in () via wing rubbing or leg friction, or the buzzing flight of bees (), helps distinguish groups acoustically in dense vegetation. patterns, like the warning coloration in lady beetles (Coleoptera) or the in hoverflies (Diptera) resembling wasps, offer visual behavioral signals for recognition without capture. These cues are most effective when combined with morphology, as noted in field protocols from entomological societies. Despite these methods, field identification has limitations, particularly for achieving genera-level accuracy in diverse or tropical habitats where cryptic species and can confound traits like antennal shape or patterns. Success rates for order-level identification often exceed 80% with experience, but family-level precision drops in high-biodiversity areas due to convergence in venation or segmentation across unrelated groups. For precise verification, specimens may require advanced lab confirmation later.

Advanced Taxonomic Methods

Advanced taxonomic methods in insect collecting involve techniques that enable precise identification and of specimens, particularly when external morphology is insufficient. These approaches build on initial field observations by employing detailed anatomical, genetic, and analyses to resolve boundaries, especially among cryptic taxa that exhibit minimal external differences. Such methods are essential for entomologists working with diverse insect orders, where subtle variations can indicate distinct evolutionary lineages. Dissection techniques, particularly the examination of genitalia, remain a cornerstone of insect taxonomy due to the rapid and species-specific morphology of reproductive structures. Specimens are typically softened in a relaxing chamber, then under a stereomicroscope to isolate and mount genitalia on slides for detailed scrutiny. This method is especially valuable for distinguishing cryptic species in Diptera, where male genitalia often provide diagnostic characters; for instance, revisions of Afrotropical Zaprionus species rely on genitalic dissections to delineate boundaries among morphologically similar flies. Similarly, in assassin bugs (), stereomicroscope imaging of male genitalia has revealed subtle differences enabling the description of new species within the genus Sclomina. These procedures require precision to avoid damaging delicate structures, and standardized terminology aids in consistent documentation across studies. Molecular techniques have revolutionized insect taxonomy by providing genetic markers that complement morphological data, particularly for identifying immature stages or degraded specimens. , which sequences a standardized 658-base-pair region of the mitochondrial subunit I (COI) , is widely used to assign specimens to with high accuracy. Protocols from the Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD) database guide the extraction, amplification, and analysis of COI sequences, allowing comparison against a global reference library of over 15 million insect barcodes (as of 2024). In Neotropical sand flies (), COI barcoding has improved species delimitation by resolving ambiguities in morphologically cryptic groups, achieving identification success rates of approximately 90%. BOLD's Barcode Index Number (BIN) system further automates clustering of sequences into provisional species units, facilitating rapid taxonomic assessments. Imaging technologies, such as scanning electron microscopy (SEM), offer unparalleled resolution for studying insect microstructures that are imperceptible under light microscopy. SEM involves coating specimens with a conductive layer (e.g., or ) and bombarding them with electrons to produce high-magnification images of surface topography, revealing fine details like setal arrangements or cuticular sculpturing. This technique supports comparative morphology by allowing direct visualization of type specimens in museum collections, aiding in the validation of species descriptions. In (Diptera), SEM has been instrumental in taxonomic revisions by elucidating antennal and larval microstructures that differentiate subfamilies. For fly genitalia, SEM enhances characterization of complex structures, as demonstrated in studies of muscoid flies where it uncovers hidden diagnostic traits. Taxonomic keys and monographs provide synthesized frameworks for , drawing on accumulated morphological and molecular to guide identifications at higher levels. The World Catalog of Insects (WCI) series compiles comprehensive nomenclatural and distributional for families and subfamilies, serving as a foundational resource for revisions. For example, WCI Volume 14 on Elmidae (Coleoptera) details over 1,500 across 150 genera, incorporating recent phylogenetic insights to refine family boundaries. These works enable entomologists to cross-reference specimens against authoritative checklists, ensuring consistency in higher-level . Usage of WCI volumes has supported global biodiversity assessments by standardizing in monographic treatments.

Scientific and Cultural Significance

Role in Entomology and Research

Insect collecting has been fundamental to documenting , serving as the primary method for describing and cataloging through preserved specimens that enable taxonomic verification and integrative studies. Approximately 1 million insect have been described to date, representing about half of all known extant across all taxa, with collections providing the type specimens essential for formal and ongoing revisions. These efforts have uncovered vast diversity, yet estimates suggest 5 to 10 million insect exist worldwide, highlighting the role of systematic collecting in bridging knowledge gaps and supporting phylogenetic analyses. Entomological collections, housing millions of specimens with associated metadata like collection dates and locations, allow researchers to track evolutionary patterns and distributional changes over centuries, as seen in studies reconstructing historical shifts. In pest management, insect collections contribute critical historical data that inform Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies by revealing patterns in pest distributions, phenology, and outbreaks. Dated specimens from the 19th century onward document patterns in species distributions, phenology, and declines, such as the American burying beetle's decline in the early 20th century, enabling predictions of future risks and the development of targeted biocontrol measures. These repositories serve as references for identifying pests during border inspections and agricultural monitoring, supporting IPM by providing baseline data on morphological variations and host associations that guide resistance management and quarantine protocols. For instance, collections have facilitated rapid responses to exotic invasives, mitigating billions in annual economic damage from invasive species, with more than 6,500 established in the U.S. alone. Voucher specimens from insect collecting play a pivotal role in , particularly in assessing extinction risks for the , where they provide verifiable evidence of presence, associations, and trends. As of 2025, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has assessed only about 12,100 insect , with approximately 20% classified as threatened, underscoring the challenges in comprehensive monitoring. These physical records are indispensable for monitoring declines, as seen in evaluations of threatened insects like fireflies, where specimens confirm taxonomic identity and support ecological connectivity analyses essential for threat categorization. By preserving genetic and morphological data, collections aid in prioritizing conservation actions, such as protection, and enable retrospective studies of environmental impacts on . Despite these contributions, significant challenges persist in insect collecting, especially in tropical regions where biodiversity hotspots remain under-sampled due to logistical barriers, limited funding, and restricted access. Gaps in tropical collections hinder comprehensive global assessments, as these areas harbor the majority of undescribed species yet face high rates of loss. Ethical considerations, including potential insect sentience and impacts, have prompted calls for adopting the "Three Rs" framework (Replace, Reduce, Refine) in sampling protocols to minimize harm. Additionally, obtaining collecting permits is increasingly stringent in protected areas, emphasizing the need for collaborative, non-commercial efforts with local authorities to ensure sustainable and equitable research practices.

Representation in Culture and Collections

Insect collecting has been prominently featured in literature, where it often symbolizes intellectual pursuit and obsession. , the renowned novelist, was an accomplished lepidopterist who began collecting and moths in his childhood in and continued this passion throughout his life, even discovering new species and influencing his literary works with entomological themes. In film, the 1958 horror classic The Fly, directed by Kurt Neumann, portrays a scientist's catastrophic experiment involving matter disintegration and reintegration, where a housefly's intrusion leads to a grotesque human-insect hybrid, highlighting public fascination with insects as metaphors for transformation and peril. During the , insect collecting emerged as a fashionable and educational among the middle and upper classes, driven by a broader craze for that encouraged amateurs to capture, mount, and display specimens as both scientific study and decorative art. This pastime extended to artistic expressions, such as intricate insect jewelry made from real wings or faux gold , reflecting colonial resource extraction and a romanticized view of nature. In modern times, institutions like the Natural History Museum in have transformed collecting traditions into immersive public exhibits, such as the Sensational Butterflies tropical house, where visitors observe live butterflies in a controlled environment to foster appreciation and conservation awareness without traditional killing methods. Notable historical collections underscore the enduring legacy of insect gathering. In the early 19th century, explorer amassed thousands of insect specimens during his expeditions across the from 1799 to 1804, contributing to early understandings of alongside his botanical work. Today, the Smithsonian Institution's houses one of the world's largest entomological collections, comprising over 35 million specimens used for ongoing research and public education. Ethical perspectives on insect collecting have evolved from the Victorian era's trophy-like pursuits, often prioritizing personal prestige over sustainability, to contemporary initiatives that emphasize non-lethal observation and data sharing. Platforms like BugGuide exemplify this shift, enabling volunteers across to upload photographs of arthropods for community identification and monitoring, thereby supporting scientific knowledge without routine specimen killing.

References

  1. https://www.ars.usda.gov/ARSUserFiles/80420580/CollectingandPreservingInsectsandMites/collpres.pdf
  2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6629709/
  3. https://entomologytoday.org/2022/02/28/collecting-insects-tools-tips-tricks/
  4. https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1790&context=honorsprojects
  5. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10644804/
  6. https://collection.ento.vt.edu/collection-uses/
  7. https://www.anspblog.org/insect-collection-valuable-to-society/
  8. https://www.nae4hydp.org/news/467783/The-Benefits-of-Insect-Collecting.htm
  9. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-biology/
  10. https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137%3Abook%3D11
  11. https://www.upress.umn.edu/9780816667659/the-insect-and-the-image/
  12. https://www.dartmouth.edu/library/rauner/exhibits/cabinet-of-curiosities.html
  13. https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/maria-sibylla-merian-metamorphosis-art-and-science.html
  14. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5047223/
  15. https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/0012-9623-94.1.36
  16. https://www.americanscientist.org/article/entomological-tales
  17. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/12554099_Entomology_in_the_Twentieth_Century
  18. https://blog.biodiversitylibrary.org/2015/04/from-early-women-in-science-to-ultraviolet-film-using-art-to-understand-insects.html
  19. https://www.museumoftheearth.org/six-legged-science/collection
  20. https://daily.jstor.org/war-and-pest-control/
  21. https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/10.1139/gen-2018-0096
  22. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6282079/
  23. https://bohart.ucdavis.edu/how-collect-insects
  24. https://mississippientomologicalmuseum.org.msstate.edu/collecting.preparation.methods/Blacklight.traps.htm
  25. https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/items/126098/bitstreams/412927/data.pdf
  26. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12263827/
  27. https://mississippientomologicalmuseum.org.msstate.edu/collecting.preparation.methods/Pitfalls.htm
  28. https://arthropods.nmsu.edu/making-an-insect-collection/collecting-insects.html
  29. https://academic.oup.com/jee/article/107/4/1508/811988
  30. https://entomology.mgcafe.uky.edu/ef112
  31. https://mississippientomologicalmuseum.org.msstate.edu/collecting.preparation.methods/Lindgrens.htm
  32. https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/IN1103
  33. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/395030976_Modern_Technologies_in_Insect_Trapping
  34. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12132586/
  35. https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecs2.1790
  36. https://mississippientomologicalmuseum.org.msstate.edu/collecting.preparation.methods/Collecting.methods.htm
  37. https://www.avma.org/sites/default/files/2020-02/Guidelines-on-Euthanasia-2020.pdf
  38. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37201631/
  39. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/370441807_2023_Guidelines_for_Protecting_and_Promoting_Insect_Welfare_in_Research
  40. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12360591/
  41. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29739833/
  42. https://extension.entm.purdue.edu/401Book/default.php?page=handling_insects
  43. https://www.sdmesa.edu/college-services/safety/laboratory-safety/science-safety-handbool-2014.pdf
  44. https://mississippientomologicalmuseum.org.msstate.edu/collecting.preparation.methods/Collectingjars.htm
  45. https://genent.cals.ncsu.edu/students/lab-schedule/lab-1-collecting-preserving-part-1-meadow-field-trip/insect-collection-instructions-2/preserving-insects-in-alcohol/
  46. https://www.ars.usda.gov/arsuserfiles/60360510/publications/King_and_Porter-2004%28M-3886%29.pdf
  47. https://www.fdacs.gov/Forest-Wildfire/Our-Forests/Forest-Health/Submission-of-Forest-Pest-Specimens-for-Identification
  48. https://growforit.ces.ncsu.edu/growforit-programs/nc-state-fair-insect-collection/creating-insect-collections/
  49. https://entomology.k-state.edu/doc/finished-chapters/s156-c-15-extreme-temps--mar29.pdf
  50. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-61902-6
  51. https://extension.entm.purdue.edu/401Book/default.php?page=catching_insects
  52. https://www.uky.edu/Ag/Entomology/ythfacts/allyr/yf808.htm
  53. https://www.amentsoc.org/insects/getting-started/equipment.html
  54. https://mem.org.msstate.edu/MEM.Pubs/specimen_prep_collecting/USDACollectingPreservingInsects.pdf
  55. https://entmuseum.ucr.edu/guides-faqs/specimen-preparation
  56. https://extension.oregonstate.edu/sites/extd8/files/documents/1/pinninginsects.pdf
  57. https://extension.entm.purdue.edu/401Book/default.php?page=pinning_large_insects
  58. https://msb.unm.edu/divisions/arthropods/_pdf/specimenlabel.pdf
  59. https://mississippientomologicalmuseum.org.msstate.edu/Specimen_labels/Specimen_labels.html
  60. https://extension.entm.purdue.edu/401Book/default.php?page=labeling_specimens
  61. https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/
  62. https://www.gbif.org/
  63. https://spnhc.org/entomology-collection-curation/
  64. https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/4/1/pgae575/7933354
  65. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3088026/
  66. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8001484/
  67. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-ento-040124-014001
  68. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4624639/
  69. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1642359323001374
  70. https://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/species-profiles-list
  71. https://www.maine.gov/dacf/php/documents/nisaweconomics.pdf
  72. https://www.qmul.ac.uk/media/news/2025/science-and-engineering/se/new-study-reveals-critical-gaps-in-insect-biodiversity-research.html
  73. https://exhibits.library.cornell.edu/nabokovs-net
  74. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0051622/plotsummary/
  75. https://daily.jstor.org/insect-jewelry-of-the-victorian-era/
  76. https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/butterflies-moths.html
  77. https://fwbg.org/2017/04/27/alexander-von-humboldt-and-the-scientific-discovery-of-america/
  78. https://naturalhistory.si.edu/research/entomology
  79. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354967738_Insect_Affects_A_Study_on_the_Motivations_of_Amateur_Entomologists_and_Implications_for_Citizen_Science
  80. https://bugguide.net/node/view/1
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.