Collecting insects in batches

I chose the second option, since there are always not enough boxes))

Yes, boxes are a big problem. I usually run out of them in the middle of the season, you have to use any box that comes to hand)).
I collect large series of mostly interesting families and subfamilies, as well as rare species (option 3), as well as smaller series of other species (except for the most common ones) (option 2).

It all depends on your goals. If you collect an amateur, then you can do with the first option.
If for some scientific purposes, then sometimes you need 100-200 pcs. I chose the last option.

I agree with Mr. Adamov - if the banal is a minimum of copies, if for the collection-also a little, but if you are going to study variability, for example, then you can't do without a large sample.

If the insect is supposedly rare or unknown to me, but stands out from what I have seen so far, and this is the Moscow region - I remember the place and 7-10 copies. Next year I will try to repeat my success. If the place is far away, I can take more. Insects that may be interesting, but similar to banal species, I take 3-6 copies. In general, I do not like to destroy beetles just like that.

Well, imho, even an amateur is preferable to collect 7 pieces. Differences are often better seen in series

More than 20-and?. More than 100, if possible. From all points and habitats. The issue of boxes, as well as the place under them, is a sore point for everyone. But there is one very important point: "collecting "for yourself" and " collecting with an eye to...". Here, obviously, everyone chooses what they like. In any case, if the collection is "working", then you definitely need a series for various types of research, scientific exchange, etc. Sooner or later everything will come in handy.
Sincerely,...

Isn't it a pity? They're still alive...No, honestly, if there is something to do, then please. But it doesn't always make sense. Only feed the kozheeds if.

I once thought so, Mr. Omar. In this case, if you are confused by the number, then it is not so great, especially if you take into account the demand for the group. Judge for yourself: some of the material is used to replenish the Institute's stock collections (this is about 40%, if we assume an average value of 100 copies), about 10% is prepared and stored in alcohol; about 30% is exchanged. In the end, there isn't much left....

Let's hope that this feeling will come to me with experience.

There is also a caveat for people with poor eyesight. Caught in the summer on the flowers of Veronica 4 small bees. Then it became a pity to catch, but I came home, looked at it and it turned out that I caught 4 different species from three genera and three families. I scolded myself very much for not catching it further. With small leaf eaters and elephants, the same body is often obtained.

Mr. Adamov is absolutely right.Well, for an amateur collection, I think 4.5 pairs is just right!Oh, and more !much depends on the range latitude and species variability

When collecting manually, I usually settle for one dozen. Of course, if it is not banal.

There is also a caveat for people with poor eyesight. Caught in the summer on the flowers of Veronica 4 small bees. Then it became a pity to catch, but I came home, looked at it and it turned out that I caught 4 different species from three genera and three families. I scolded myself very much for not catching it further. With small leaf eaters and elephants, the same body is often obtained.

The smaller the object, the more they should be taken

Here is an example with myrmidons or broom yolks (Colias myrmidone). This year I came to Nerskaya, and there are a dozen and a half of them flying in sight! Even from the grass scared off. I scored several dozen of them there, obviously not less than fifty. I put 20 pieces for myself (this is also taking into account that females of two forms and individuals with a transitional color). Naturally, I tried to select absolutely fresh ones - so that the pink border was intact. Those who wanted yolks were also found - that's the exchange. Someone just presented a female form of alba, etc.
If it flies so much, then you need to swing the net more often, what if ginandromorph gets caught?
How much to catch - of course, in any case, depending on the goals of the importer. Let's say that a person needs only one single copy for complete happiness. That's for nothing, except "to be". So then this copy is worth it, even in the singular, but the soul of its owner pleases.

After a week and a half, I was back at the Burrow, already with a different purpose - I collected C. lunula caterpillars. There are no fewer butterflies.
And this is after other forum participants visited the forum in addition to me.
And the caterpillars - as on August 9-came across different ages, and on August 18-the same picture.

There is also a caveat for people with poor eyesight. Caught in the summer on the flowers of Veronica 4 small bees. Then it became a pity to catch, but I came home, looked at it and it turned out that I caught 4 different species from three genera and three families. I scolded myself very much for not catching it further. With small leaf eaters and elephants, the same body is often obtained.

I also collected 7 moths of the genus Eupithecia a few years ago. They're all the same, damn it! I brought it to Elena Mikhailovna Antonova at the Zoo Museum. She dissected their genitals and identified all seven of them as different.

Yes, this often happens, especially with moths and scoops, let alone micro ones...

Yes, a lot of things need to be collected, very much. This summer, I found a staff member who is known only for the ocd types. Odessa. So I rowed as much as I could, and there were a hundred and a half. It's just that sometimes it's physically unrealistic to take everything. For example, in May in Karapty, I physically could not take all the beetles I was interested in in large batches. And the question also arises: how to limit yourself?

I don't know about your colleagues, but for me - there are not many insects!
I chose the last option, of course!

this is the problem of all insects.. Golubyanka, tolstogolovka especially.. If I hadn't been more attentive, hadn't been looking for pre-defined fatheads and pigeons, and hadn't understood our species, I might have missed flocciferus, lavatere, armoricanus, alveus, and serratula (and I caught them only in 2 places, where in addition to these species, only alce and malve are in large numbers).vah, and these nasodki in single ekz..).. And beetles, bedbugs, moths, etc. Tmem entomology and interesting

I chose the penultimate option, although there is no such thing to judge.. If necessary, I'll take it, if not necessary , I won't take it at all. Sometimes 1 for yourself, sometimes 5, sometimes more than 20 for yourself, exchange. About spring generally silent.. zagreb was strong enough for as long as it took to get sick, but there were still a lot of them left, and at the end of the summer there were no less..

I chose the latter option, because I collect not only for the purpose of collecting, but also to study seasonal dynamics, biotopic timing, identify dominant species, and so on. For such studies several copies will not be enough

I chose the second option.Although I catch a lot, but not for myself.I keep 3-4 pieces for myself.The rest is for exchange.I don't know about the Myrmidons,but I'm sure there will be fewer archons this year.At the same time,I let go of butterflies with defects (scuffs, broken ones) without strangling them.It got so ridiculous that he caught broken archons in other places, and transported them to a place closer to home, in the hope of replenishing the population for the next year.This does not apply to several rare species in our country .These I take in the hope of changing over time to non-broken ones.

But I have as much as the soil trap will fall, so much and take

It depends on whom... If bark beetles - then I take "volumes", because usually poking around in the forest is not always comfortable-mosquitoes, and even on the tree "hang". So I break branches and go indoors. And then all those who "did not hide", some are damaged when cutting the bark, some go for installation in their collection, some -in the collection of colleagues and in ZIN, some in alcohol-to colleagues for DNA, etc... So everyone diverges.

I collect insects in series, so that later, when you start to identify them, it doesn't hurt excruciatingly that what you thought was one species turns out to be several similar ones, and there are so few copies of each one... Of course, I limit myself to a few instances, if the species is known and taken "for a point" or the species is really rare and local and "brute force" can damage the population. An example of polednego is the only known population of Hapalus bimaculatus in the region, which occupies an area of 10 by 20 meters and counts less than a hundred beetles annually.

It depends on whom and for what purposes. If something is specific "for a point", then one is enough. And some mordellisten (or something similar) I take while all-how many I will collect (well, I don't know how to determine the genitals in natural conditions ). Any interesting skrytnozhivushestv (leiodidy, oschupniki, etc.), too, I take as much as I have - they still don't give out a lot

I chose the second option - but I will write a reservation: I take 4-6 copies. from one, first place - and from the second, third, etc. - one or two more copies, if not a new subspecies for me.

Depends on the type.... If there is an apollo thread that occurs locally, then you can just catch it!!! And this is barbarism, not entomology with collectibles!!! And so I take a lot of them, if the view is interesting or it will be possible to change it later. Chose the last option.....

Can I also share my opinion ? I took up "entomology" after...... A 22-year break, I have collected a small collection so far, but ... .. on the topic - only glue, they don't argue about tastes, but I don't understand why a dozen of the same crookedly pinned butterflies of slightly different sizes should fit under one glass, they almost climb on each other, according to my opinion this is an ugliness ....IMHO... why withdraw, for example, 10 of the same rare beetles, but 1-2 are not sufficiently developed ?In general, if they do not deviate from the topic, then only glue, for one insect-one showcase, if small, then a maximum of three in one. Here is....

Can I also share my opinion ? 1-2 not developed enough ?

Not enough!
I used to think so too. that 2 beetles in the collection is enough. But if you delve into the topic, you will understand that this is not enough.
First of all,because some beetles (possibly butterflies)have a strong individual variability . If you do not say that they are from one place and do not see the entire series ,you can easily take them for different types.
And then, some smart guys describe the devil knows what, not without taking into account this particular individual variability .And you are drying your head, that there is something looking for standard copies.
Having the same series (6-10ex, different aberrations). at least you can understand hoo is hoo.

This post was edited by rpanin - 26.08.2008 19: 07

And the beauty of "composition"? remains only the fate of commerce ?

Well, well.
1. If a person is only an aesthetic collector, then the number of copies is limited. it's his own business. Someone likes 1-2 copies, someone likes series, someone only series of certain types.

2. If a person climbs into science and wants to clarify the situation with a particular species, then 1-2 copies can not be dispensed with - here you need a series, and several beetles with each aberration, with each color or some other shape.

3. In general, series are very important in science.. It happens that 9 out of 10 copies have some color or shape, and the 10th one is always different. You can collect 5 beetles and say enough is enough, and from the next area describe a new subspecies or species based on the one (s)that you have found a copy of a different form. And then there will be a lot of errors and they will think for a long time about a subspecies that does not exist.

And in general, let's stop arguing about morals! I like to eat 5 candies at a time, but I only eat 1, so you're a moron and I'm a good one - who cares!

And the beauty of "composition"? remains only the fate of commerce ?

IMHO, this is definitely the case...

And the beauty of "composition"? remains only the fate of commerce ?

Nah, not commerce.
Compromise -behind the glass on the wall 2-3ex. and in a couple of different pieces in the stash.
And then, it's for other definable species.

what kind of nonsense is this? Is it commercial to collect only carbuses?? What about stamps, coins, and pupae?
If some people look at a certain activity only from a commercial point of view, this does not mean that everyone is a merchant... Or did I misunderstand something??? If not science, then commerce, if not 2 copies, but 3 then commerce, if you paid for the trip, then commerce?

2. If a person climbs into science and wants to clarify the situation with a particular species, then 1-2 copies can not be dispensed with - here you need a series, and several beetles with each aberration, with each color or some other shape.

It seems to me that this is no longer a science, but a personal interest, isn't it already described enough? Hy ... No, I'm grazing him up to his belly... I'm just talking about rare species.. Why catch a lot of things.. Of course progress deals more damage than collectors but...

Rare species are utter nonsense. There are some types that a person can't find, but that doesn't mean that there are 10 of them and you can assemble them manually.. This would only be possible if it is the last population on a single tree.. But then the species is already doomed. This is shown by many types, many years of practice, that it is not possible to collect everything, trample it out-yes.

This description is not enough! Not much, not clear enough, not right enough! Nah then all this is necessary, if not to describe what better reflects reality? Christian prejudice maybe?
And then what to do-stupidly collect beetles and not even know what is in the collection, because it is not described, under-described, not correctly described or what? Or to conduct "scientific work" against a certain species that is not one? Imagine, for example, if a Colorado Potato beetle had a double species, but no one would know about it... And here the real Colorado Potato would not have one natural enemy, and the doppelganger species would have a completely different one.. and for hundreds of years, "scientists" would spend time trying to destroy the Colorado Potato beetle by the enemy of the pseudo-Colorado Potato beetle... Empty verma, empty money, lots and lots of emptiness...

A real scientist should be interested in the truth, not whether someone has described a lot or not, and what projects are needed by some incomprehensible people who do not understand whether they are using it for good or not.

"It seems to me that this is no longer a science, but a personal interest, isn't it already described enough?"
Then what is science? Basically, all discoveries come from within - out of personal interest. And for the benefit of what then to serve, the motherland? But then this is not science, but popolizanie because of the blindness and limitations of man. Out of love for humanity, is this science? But then what's the point of working for people who will never return this love...
And in general, what is "enough"??? Is 6 mld dishes enough? is the universe enough? Is infinity enough? Is a loaf of bread enough for a hungry person??? There is no limit to these questions. There is only an inner tightness that restricts itself, and that's all!